We study contextual bandit problems with correlated arms and access to surrogate reward signals produced by a machine learning model, motivated by applications such as large language model (LLM) routing. Unlike classical contextual bandits that rely solely on bandit feedback and assume conditional independence across arms, our setting allows context-dependent inter-arm correlations and auxiliary reward information that may be noisy or misspecified. We propose algorithms that leverage such surrogate rewards through two complementary designs. A coupled reward-mixing approach pools true and surrogate rewards to accelerate learning when surrogate signals are reliable, while a decoupled prediction-mixing approach maintains separate estimators for bandit feedback and surrogate rewards and adaptively combines their predictions. This decoupling yields robustness to surrogate misspecification, recovering regret guarantees comparable to reward-only bandit methods in the worst case, while achieving improved regret when surrogate predictions are sufficiently informative. We provide theoretical regret analyses for both approaches and evaluate them on LLM routing benchmarks under varying accuracy versus cost trade-offs. The results demonstrate improved sample efficiency and consistently better accuracy-cost trade-offs compared to standard contextual bandit baselines and strong static routing methods.
Multi-hop question-answering systems often use expensive retrieval on every question. They may decompose the question, run several retrieval rounds, or search through bridge entities before answering. All of these strategies rely on repeated LLM calls to rewrite or decompose the question, which increases extra token cost, and it is not fitting when the LLM budget is tight. However, our analysis shows that lots of multi-hop questions are already answered correctly by a single one-shot RAG, so running an extra retrieval on every question wastes the budget. We introduce RASER (Recoverability-Aware Selective Escalation Router), a family of cheap routers built on one-shot RAG and six features from it. RASER-2 decides whether to stop or escalate to the extra-retrieval action PRUNE. RASER-3 chooses among one-shot RAG, PRUNE, and iterative retrieval IRCoT, using the same features but adding an explicit cost-accuracy trade-off. Neither router makes an extra LLM call to decide. Across six LLMs and three multi-hop QA benchmarks, both routers stay competitive with the other state-of-the-art (SOTA) baselines in F1 while spending only 41-49% of always-prune's tokens and also less than the iterative and decomposition retrieval baselines.