Exploration vs exploitation
A classic A/B test is pure exploration: we spend the same amount of traffic on both variations right
up to the final decision. MAB balances the two:
- Exploration — it keeps sending a small share of traffic to the weaker variation, in case the
data so far is misleading - Exploitation — it gives most of the traffic to the leading variation while the test is still running
Day 1: A — 50%, B — 50% (not much data yet)
Day 5: A — 35%, B — 65% (B starts to pull ahead)
Day 10: A — 10%, B — 90% (B is clearly better)
Day 14: A — 3%, B — 97% (B has all but monopolised the traffic)
Thompson sampling — how the algorithm works
- Each variation carries a beta distribution, Beta(α, β), where α = conversions and β = non-conversions
- For every new visitor the algorithm samples a value from each variation’s distribution
- The visitor is shown the variation with the highest sampled value
- As data accumulates the distributions narrow → the leader receives more and more traffic
When MAB beats a classic A/B test
| Scenario | Classic A/B | MAB |
|---|---|---|
| Long test, high traffic | ✓ Preferred | Works fine |
| Short seasonal test | May never reach its sample | ✓ Optimal |
| Three or more variations | Needs a Bonferroni correction | ✓ Native |
| Strict p-value significance required | ✓ Preferred | Not guaranteed |
| Recommendation algorithms | Works fine | ✓ Optimal |
The limits of MAB
MAB is not perfect. Its limitations:
- It does not guarantee strict statistical significance in the classic sense
- It can pick a winner too quickly on thin traffic, off early fluctuations
- The final result is harder to interpret when the decision has to be documented