We study partial-feedback online learning, where each instance admits a set of correct labels, but the learner only observes one correct label per round; any prediction within the correct set is counted as correct. This model captures settings such as language generation, where multiple responses may be valid but data provide only a single reference. We give a near-complete characterization of minimax regret for both deterministic and randomized learners in the set-realizable regime, i.e., in the regime where sublinear regret is generally attainable. For deterministic learners, we introduce the Partial-Feedback Littlestone dimension (PFLdim) and show it precisely governs learnability and minimax regret; technically, PFLdim cannot be defined via the standard version space, requiring a new collection version space viewpoint and an auxiliary dimension used only in the proof. We further develop the Partial-Feedback Measure Shattering dimension (PMSdim) to obtain tight bounds for randomized learners. We identify broad conditions ensuring inseparability between deterministic and randomized learnability (e.g., finite Helly number or nested-inclusion label structure), and extend the argument to set-valued online learning, resolving an open question of Raman et al. [2024b]. Finally, we show a sharp separation from weaker realistic and agnostic variants: outside set realizability, the problem can become information-theoretically intractable, with linear regret possible even for $|H|=2$. This highlights the need for fundamentally new, noise-sensitive complexity measures to meaningfully characterize learnability beyond set realizability.

Consider the domain of multiclass classification within the adversarial online setting. What is the price of relying on bandit feedback as opposed to full information? To what extent can an adaptive adversary amplify the loss compared to an oblivious one? To what extent can a randomized learner reduce the loss compared to a deterministic one? We study these questions in the mistake bound model and provide nearly tight answers.We demonstrate that the optimal mistake bound under bandit feedback is at most $O(k)$ times higher than the optimal mistake bound in the full information case, where $k$ represents the number of labels. This bound is tight and provides an answer to an open question previously posed and studied by Daniely and Helbertal ['13] and by Long ['17, '20], who focused on deterministic learners.Moreover, we present nearly optimal bounds of $\tilde{\Theta}(k)$ on the gap between randomized and deterministic learners, as well as between adaptive and oblivious adversaries in the bandit feedback setting. This stands in contrast to the full information scenario, where adaptive and oblivious adversaries are equivalent, and the gap in mistake bounds between randomized and deterministic learners is a constant multiplicative factor of $2$.In addition, our results imply that in some cases the optimal randomized mistake bound is approximately the square-root of its deterministic parallel. Previous results show that this is essentially the smallest it can get.Some of our results are proved via a reduction to prediction with expert advice under bandit feedback, a problem interesting on its own right. For this problem, we provide a randomized algorithm which is nearly optimal in some scenarios.

Consider the task of learning a hypothesis class $\mathcal{H}$ in the presence of an adversary that can replace up to an $\eta$ fraction of the examples in the training set with arbitrary adversarial examples. The adversary aims to fail the learner on a particular target test point $x$ which is \emph{known} to the adversary but not to the learner. In this work we aim to characterize the smallest achievable error $\epsilon=\epsilon(\eta)$ by the learner in the presence of such an adversary in both realizable and agnostic settings.

Consider the domain of multiclass classification within the adversarial online setting. What is the price of relying on bandit feedback as opposed to full information? To what extent can an adaptive adversary amplify the loss compared to an oblivious one? To what extent can a randomized learner reduce the loss compared to a deterministic one? We study these questions in the mistake bound model and provide nearly tight answers.We demonstrate that the optimal mistake bound under bandit feedback is at most O(k) times higher than the optimal mistake bound in the full information case, where k represents the number of labels.

Consider the task of learning a hypothesis class \mathcal{H} in the presence of an adversary that can replace up to an \eta fraction of the examples in the training set with arbitrary adversarial examples. The adversary aims to fail the learner on a particular target test point x which is \emph{known} to the adversary but not to the learner. In this work we aim to characterize the smallest achievable error \epsilon \epsilon(\eta) by the learner in the presence of such an adversary in both realizable and agnostic settings. Remarkably, we show that the upper bound can be attained by a deterministic learner. In the agnostic setting we reveal a more elaborate landscape: we devise a deterministic learner with a multiplicative regret guarantee of \epsilon \leq C\cdot\mathtt{OPT} O(\mathtt{VC}(\mathcal{H})\cdot \eta), where C 1 is a universal numerical constant.

Consider the task of learning a hypothesis class $\mathcal{H}$ in the presence of an adversary that can replace up to an $\eta$ fraction of the examples in the training set with arbitrary adversarial examples. The adversary aims to fail the learner on a particular target test point $x$ which is known to the adversary but not to the learner. In this work we aim to characterize the smallest achievable error $\epsilon=\epsilon(\eta)$ by the learner in the presence of such an adversary in both realizable and agnostic settings. We fully achieve this in the realizable setting, proving that $\epsilon=\Theta(\mathtt{VC}(\mathcal{H})\cdot \eta)$, where $\mathtt{VC}(\mathcal{H})$ is the VC dimension of $\mathcal{H}$. Remarkably, we show that the upper bound can be attained by a deterministic learner. In the agnostic setting we reveal a more elaborate landscape: we devise a deterministic learner with a multiplicative regret guarantee of $\epsilon \leq C\cdot\mathtt{OPT} + O(\mathtt{VC}(\mathcal{H})\cdot \eta)$, where $C > 1$ is a universal numerical constant. We complement this by showing that for any deterministic learner there is an attack which worsens its error to at least $2\cdot \mathtt{OPT}$. This implies that a multiplicative deterioration in the regret is unavoidable in this case. Finally, the algorithms we develop for achieving the optimal rates are inherently improper. Nevertheless, we show that for a variety of natural concept classes, such as linear classifiers, it is possible to retain the dependence $\epsilon=\Theta_{\mathcal{H}}(\eta)$ by a proper algorithm in the realizable setting. Here $\Theta_{\mathcal{H}}$ conceals a polynomial dependence on $\mathtt{VC}(\mathcal{H})$.