Figure 3: Comparison of the proposed Algorithm 1 (i.e., LUB-CDM) and the straightforward strategy. 's expected payoff, where the improvement is at the cost of P In this example, we compare the proposed Algorithm 1 with the patient strategy, where the latter method pulls arms according to the latent utility at the beginning stage but has more strategic behaviors as the matching proceeds. Adachi's model involves a stage discount Figure 4: Performance of the proposed Algorithm 1 (i.e., LUB-CDM) and the patient strategy. 's reservation utility under the LUB-CDM given by Note that LUB-CDM has less strategic behaviors as the matching proceeds. On the other hand, the patient strategy has more strategic behaviors as the matching proceeds.