The stable marriage problem is a well-known problem of matching men to women so that no man and woman who are not married to each other both prefer each other. Such a problem has a wide variety of practical applications ranging from matching resident doctors to hospitals to matching students to schools. A well-known algorithm to solve this problem is the Gale-Shapley algorithm, which runs in polynomial time. It has been proven that stable marriage procedures can always be manipulated. Whilst the Gale-Shapley algorithm is computationally easy to manipulate, we prove that there exist stable marriage procedures which are NP-hard to manipulate. We also consider the relationship between voting theory and stable marriage procedures, showing that voting rules which are NP-hard to manipulate can be used to define stable marriage procedures which are themselves NP-hard to manipulate. Finally, we consider the issue that stable marriage procedures like Gale-Shapley favour one gender over the other, and we show how to use voting rules to make any stable marriage procedure gender neutral.
In @cite_7 fairness of a matching procedure is defined in terms of four axioms, two of which are gender neutrality and peer indifference. Then, the existence of a matching procedures satisfying all or a subset of the axioms is considered in terms of restrictions on preference orderings. Here, instead, we propose a preprocessing step that allows to obtain a gender neutral matching procedure from any matching procedure without imposing any restrictions on the preferences in the input. A detailed description of results about manipulation of stable marriage procedures can be found in @cite_6 . In particular, several early results @cite_4 @cite_20 @cite_3 @cite_11 indicated the futility of men lying, focusing later work mostly on strategies in which the women lie. Gale and Sotomayor @cite_16 presented the manipulation strategy in which women truncate their preference lists. Roth and Vate @cite_2 discussed strategic issues when the stable matching is chosen at random, proposed a truncation strategy and showed that every stable matching can be achieved as an equilibrium in truncation strategies. We instead do not allow the elimination of men from a woman's preference ordering, but permit reordering of the preference lists.
@cite_4 @cite_7 @cite_3 @cite_6 @cite_2 @cite_16 @cite_20 @cite_11
1992705916 2053079891 1605637365 1974769140 2037790669 2033898593 2071667058
The stable marriage problem is a well-known problem of matching men to women so that no man and woman who are not married to each other both prefer each other. Such a problem has a wide variety of practical applications ranging from matching resident doctors to hospitals to matching students to schools. A well-known algorithm to solve this problem is the Gale-Shapley algorithm, which runs in polynomial time. It has been proven that stable marriage procedures can always be manipulated. Whilst the Gale-Shapley algorithm is computationally easy to manipulate, we prove that there exist stable marriage procedures which are NP-hard to manipulate. We also consider the relationship between voting theory and stable marriage procedures, showing that voting rules which are NP-hard to manipulate can be used to define stable marriage procedures which are themselves NP-hard to manipulate. Finally, we consider the issue that stable marriage procedures like Gale-Shapley favour one gender over the other, and we show how to use voting rules to make any stable marriage procedure gender neutral. We study strategic issues in the Gale-Shapley stable marriage model. In the first part of the paper, we derive the optimal cheating strategy and show that it is not always possible for a woman to recover her women-optimal stable partner from the men-optimal stable matching mechanism when she can only cheat by permuting her preferences. In fact, we show, using simulation, that the chances that a woman can benefit from cheating are slim. In the second part of the paper, we consider a two-sided matching market found in Singapore. We study the matching mechanism used by the Ministry of Education (MOE) in the placement of primary six students in secondary schools, and discuss why the current method has limited success in accommodating the preferences of the students, and the specific needs of the schools (in terms of the “mix” of admitted students). Using insights from the first part of the paper, we show that stable matching mechanisms are more appropriate in this matching market and explain why the strategic behavior of the students need not be a major concern. (Stable Marriage; Strategic Issues; Gale-Shapley Algorithm; Student Posting Exercise) Given a set of n men represented by n points lying on a line, and n women represented by n points lying on another parallel line, with each person having a list that ranks some people of opposite gender as his her acceptable partners in strict order of preference. In this problem, we want to match people of opposite genders to satisfy people’s preferences as well as making the edges not crossing one another geometrically. A noncrossing blocking pair w.r.t. a matching M is a pair (m, w) of a man and a woman such that they are not matched with each other but prefer each other to their own partners in M, and the segment (m, w) does not cross any edge in M. A weakly stable noncrossing matching (WSNM) is a noncrossing matching that does not admit any noncrossing blocking pair. In this paper, we prove the existence of a WSNM in any instance by developing an (O(n^2) ) algorithm to find one in a given instance. The stable marriage problem is a well-known problem of matching men to women so that no man and woman, who are not married to each other, both prefer each other. Such a problem has a wide variety of practical applications, ranging from matching resident doctors to hospitals, to matching students to schools or more generally to any two-sided market. In the classical stable marriage problem, both men and women express a strict preference order over the members of the other sex, in a qualitative way. Here we consider stable marriage problems with weighted preferences: each man (resp., woman) provides a score for each woman (resp., man). Such problems are more expressive than the classical stable marriage problems. Moreover, in some real-life situations it is more natural to express scores (to model, for example, profits or costs) rather than a qualitative preference ordering. In this context, we define new notions of stability and optimality, and we provide algorithms to find marriages which are stable and or optimal according to these notions. While expressivity greatly increases by adopting weighted preferences, we show that in most cases the desired solutions can be found by adapting existing algorithms for the classical stable marriage problem. The stable marriage (SM) problem has a wide variety of practical applications, ranging from matching resident doctors to hospitals, to matching students to schools or, more generally, to any two-sided market. In the classical formulation, n men and n women express their preferences (via a strict total order) over the members of the other sex. Solving an SM problem means finding a stable marriage where stability is an envy-free notion: no man and woman who are not married to each other would both prefer each other to their partners or to being single. We consider both the classical stable marriage problem and one of its useful variations (denoted SMTI (Stable Marriage with Ties and Incomplete lists)) where the men and women express their preferences in the form of an incomplete preference list with ties over a subset of the members of the other sex. Matchings are permitted only with people who appear in these preference lists, and we try to find a stable matching that marries as many people as possible. Whilst the SM problem is polynomial to solve, the SMTI problem is NP-hard. We propose to tackle both problems via a local search approach, which exploits properties of the problems to reduce the size of the neighborhood and to make local moves efficiently. We empirically evaluate our algorithm for SM problems by measuring its runtime behavior and its ability to sample the lattice of all possible stable marriages. We evaluate our algorithm for SMTI problems in terms of both its runtime behavior and its ability to find a maximum cardinality stable marriage. Experimental results suggest that for SM problems, the number of steps of our algorithm grows only as O(n log(n)), and that it samples very well the set of all stable marriages. It is thus a fair and efficient approach to generate stable marriages. Furthermore, our approach for SMTI problems is able to solve large problems, quickly returning stable matchings of large and often optimal size, despite the NP-hardness of this problem. We present the first complete algorithm for the SMTI problem, the stable marriage problem with ties and incomplete lists. We do this in the form of a constraint programming encoding of the problem. With this we are able to carry out the first empirical study of the complete solution of SMTI instances. In the stable marriage problem (SM) [5] we have n men and n women. Each man ranks the women, giving himself a preference list. Similarly each woman ranks the men, giving herself a preference list. The problem is then to marry men and women such that they are stable i.e. such that there is no incentive for individuals to divorce and elope. This problem is polynomial time solvable. However, when preference lists contain ties and are incomplete (SMTI) the problem of determining if there is a stable matching of size n is then NP-complete, as is the optimisation problem of finding the largest or smallest stable matching [6, 10]. In this paper we present constraint programming solutions for the SMTI decision and optimisation problems, a problem generator for random instances of SMTI, and an empirical study of this problem. We consider Stable Marriage with Covering Constraints (SMC): in this variant of Stable Marriage, we distinguish a subset of women as well as a subset of men, and we seek a matching with fewest number of blocking pairs that matches all of the distinguished people. We investigate how a set of natural parameters, namely the maximum length of preference lists for men and women, the number of distinguished men and women, and the number of blocking pairs allowed determine the computational tractability of this problem. In the stable roommates (SR) problem we have n agents, where each agent ranks all other agents in strict order of preference. The problem is then to match agents into pairs such that no two agents prefer each other to their matched partners, and this is a stable matching. The stable marriage (SM) problem is a special case of SR, where we have two equal sized sets of agents, men and women, where men rank only women and women rank only men. Every instance of SM admits at least one stable matching, whereas for SR as the number of agents increases the number of instances with stable matchings decreases. So, what will happen if in SM we allow men to rank men and women to rank women, i.e. we relax gender separation? Will stability abruptly disappear? And what happens in a stable roommates scenario if agents do not rank all other agents? Again, is stability uncommon? And finally, what happens if there are an odd number of agents? We present empirical evidence to answer these questions. We study the behavior of random walks along the edges of the stable marriage lattice for various restricted families of allowable preference sets. In the "k-attribute model," each man is valued in each of k attributes, and each woman's ranking of the men is determined by a linear function, representing her relative ranking of those attributes; men's rankings of the women are determined similarly. We show that sampling with a random walk on the marriage lattice can take exponential time, even when k = 2. Moreover, we show that the marriage lattices arising in the k-attribute model are more restrictive than in the general setting; previously such a restriction had only been shown for the sets of preference lists. The second model we consider is the "k-range model," where each person lies in a position in [i, i + k - 1], for some i, on every preference list of the opposite sex. When k = 1 there is a unique stable marriage. When k = 2 there already can be an exponential number of stable marriages, but we show that a random walk on the stable marriage lattice always converges quickly to equilibrium. However, when k ≥ 5, there are preference sets such that the random walk on the lattice will require exponential time to converge. Lastly, we show that in the extreme case where each gender's rankings of the other are restricted to one of just a constant k possible preference lists, there are still instances for which the Markov chain mixes exponentially slowly, even when k = 4. This oversimplification of the general model helps elucidate why Markov chains based on spouse-swapping are not good approaches to sampling, even in specialized scenarios. Both rematching proof and strong equilibrium outcomes are stable with respect to the true preferences in the marriage problem. We show that not all rematching proof or strong equilibrium outcomes are stable in the college admissions problem. But we show that both rematching proof and strong equilibrium outcomes in truncations at the match point are all stable in the college admissions problem. Further, all true stable matchings can be achieved in both rematching proof and strong equilibrium in truncations at the match point. We show that any Nash equilibrium in truncations admits one and only one matching, stable or not. Therefore, the core at a Nash equilibrium in truncations must be small. But examples exist such that the set of stable matchings with respect to a Nash equilibrium may contain more than one matching. Nevertheless, each Nash equilibrium can only admit at most one true stable matching. If, indeed, there is a true stable matching at a Nash equilibrium, then the only possible equilibrium outcome will be the true stable matching, no matter how different are players' equilibrium strategies from the true preferences and how many other unstable matchings are there at that Nash equilibrium. Thus, we show that a necessary and sufficient condition for the stable matching rule to be implemented in a subset of Nash equilibria by the direct revelation game induced by a stable mechanism is that every Nash equilibrium profile in that subset admits one and only one true stable matching. Lying in order to manipulate the Gale-Shapley matching algorithm has been studied by Dubins and Freedman (1981) and by Gale and Sotomayor (1985), and was shown to be generally more appealing to the proposed-to side (denoted as the women in Gale and Shapley's seminal paper (1962)) than to the proposing side (denoted as men there). It can also be shown that in the case of lying women, for every woman who is better off due to lying, there exists a man who is worse off. In this paper, we show that an even stronger dichotomy between the goals of the sexes holds, namely, if no woman is worse off then no man is better off, while a form of sisterhood between the lying and the "innocent" women also holds, namely, if none of the former is worse off, then neither is any of the latter. These results are robust: they generalize to the one-to-many variants of the algorithm and do not require the resulting matching to be stable (i.e. they hold even in out-of-equilibria situations). The machinery we develop in our proofs sheds new light on the structure of lying by women in the Gale-Shapley matching algorithm. This paper is based upon an undergraduate thesis (2007) by the first author. The stable marriage problem is that of matching n men and n women, each of whom has ranked the members of the opposite sex in order of preference, so that no unmatched couple both prefer each other to their partners under the matching. At least one stable matching exists for every stable marriage instance, and efficient algorithms for finding such a matching are well known. The stable roommates problem involves a single set of even cardinality n, each member of which ranks all the others in order of preference. A stable matching is now a partition of this single set into n2 pairs so that no two unmatched members both prefer each other to their partners under the matching. In this case, there are problem instances for which no stable matching exists. However, the present paper describes an O(n2) algorithm that will determine, for any instance of the problem, whether a stable matching exists, and if so, will find such a matching. We consider variants of the classical stable marriage problem in which preference lists may contain ties, and may be of bounded length. Such restrictions arise naturally in practical applications, such as centralised matching schemes that assign graduating medical students to their first hospital posts. In such a setting, weak stability is the most common solution concept, and it is known that weakly stable matchings can have different sizes. This motivates the problem of finding a maximum cardinality weakly stable matching, which is known to be NP-hard in general. We show that this problem is solvable in polynomial time if each man's list is of length at most 2 (even for women's lists that are of unbounded length). However if each man's list is of length at most 3, we show that the problem becomes NP-hard (even if each women's list is of length at most 3) and not approximable within some @d>1 (even if each woman's list is of length at most 4). The Stable Marriage Problem and its many variants have been widely studied in the literature (Gusfield and Irving, The Stable Marriage Problem: Structure and Algorithms, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1989; Roth and Sotomayor, Two-sided matching: a study in game-theoretic modeling and analysis, Econometric Society Monographs, vol. 18, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990; Knuth, Stable Marriage and its Relation to Other Combinatorial Problems, CRM Proceedings and Lecture Notes, vol. 10, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1997), partly because of the inherent appeal of the problem, partly because of the elegance of the associated structures and algorithms, and partly because of important practical applications, such as the National Resident Matching Program (Roth, J. Political Economy 92(6) (1984) 991) and similar large-scale matching schemes. Here, we present the first comprehensive study of variants of the problem in which the preference lists of the participants are not necessarily complete and not necessarily totally ordered. We show that, under surprisingly restrictive assumptions, a number of these variants are hard, and hard to approximate. The key observation is that, in contrast to the case where preference lists are complete or strictly ordered (or both), a given problem instance may admit stable matchings of different sizes. In this setting, examples of problems that are hard are: finding a stable matching of maximum or minimum size, determining whether a given pair is stableeven if the indifference takes the form of ties on one side only, the ties are at the tails of lists, there is at most one tie per list, and each tie is of length 2; and finding, or approximating, both an egalitarian' and a minimum regret' stable matching. However, we give a 2-approximation algorithm for the problems of finding a stable matching of maximum or minimum size. We also discuss the significant implications of our results for practical matching schemes. We analyze the Gale-Shapley matching problem within the context of Rawlsian justice. Defining a fair matching algorithm by a set of 4 axioms (Gender Indifference, Peer Indifference, Maximin Optimality, and Stability), we show that not all preference profiles admit a fair matching algorithm, the reason being that even this set of minimal axioms is too strong in a sense. Because of conflict between Stability and Maximin Optimality, even the algorithm which generates the mutual agreement match, paradoxically, has no chance to be fair. Abstract Two-sided matching markets of the kind known as the “college admissions problem” have been widely thought to be virtually equivalent to the simpler “marriage problem” for which some striking results concerning agents' preferences and incentives have been recently obtained. It is shown here that some of these results do not generalize to the college admissions problem, contrary to a number of assertions in the recent literature. No stable matching procedure exists that makes it a dominant strategy for colleges to reveal their true preferences, and some outcomes may be preferred by all colleges to the college-optimal stable outcome. Abstract Documents in computer-readable form can be used to provide information about other documents, i.e. those they cite. To do this efficiently requires procedures for computer recognition of citing statements. This is not easy, especially for multi-sentence citing statements. Computer recognition procedures have been developed which are accurate to the following extent: 73 of the words in statements selected by computer procedures as being citing statements are words which are correctly attributable to the corresponding documents. The retrieval effectiveness of computer-recognized citing statements was tested in the following way. First, for eight retrieval requests in inorganiic chemistry, average recall by search of Chemical Abstracts Service indexing and Chemical Abstracts abstract text words was found to be 50 . Words from citing statements referring to the papers to be retrieved were then added to the index terms and abstract words as additional access points, and searching was repeated. Average recall increased to 70 . Only words from citing statements published within a year of the cited papers were used. The retrieval effect of citing statement words alone (published within a year) without index or abstract terms was the following: average recall was 40 . When just the words of the titles of the cited papers were added to those citing statement words, average recall increased to 50 . This paper addresses strategies for the stable marriage problem. For the Gale-Shapley algorithm with men proposing, a classical theorem states that it is impossible for every cheating man to get a better partner than the one he gets if everyone is truthful. We study how to circumvent this theorem and incite men to cheat. First we devise coalitions in which a nonempty subset of the liars get better partners and no man is worse off than before. This strategy is limited in that not everyone in the coalition has the incentive to falsify his list. In an attempt to rectify this situation we introduce the element of randomness, but the theorem shows surprising robustness: it is impossible that every liar has a chance to improve the rank of his partner while no one gets hurt. To overcome the problem that some men lack the motivation to lie, we exhibit another randomized lying strategy in which every liar can expect to get a better partner on average, though with a chance of getting a worse one. Finally, we consider a variant scenario: instead of using the Gale-Shapley algorithm, suppose the stable matching is chosen at random. We present a modified form of the coalition strategy ensuring that every man in the coalition has a new probability distribution over partners which majorizes the original one. The stable marriage problem has recently been studied in its general setting, where both ties and incomplete lists are allowed. It is NP-hard to find a stable matching of maximum size, while any stable matching is a maximal matching and thus trivially we can obtain a 2-approximation algorithm. In this article, we give the first nontrivial result for approximation of factor less than two. Our algorithm achieves an approximation ratio of 2 (1 p L−2) for instances in which only men have ties of length at most L. When both men and women are allowed to have ties but the lengths are limited to two, then we show a ratio of 13 7( 1.1052). Given an instance I of the classical Stable Marriage problem with Incomplete preference lists (smi), a maximum cardinality matching can be larger than a stable matching. In many large-scale applications of smi, we seek to match as many agents as possible. This motivates the problem of finding a maximum cardinality matching in I that admits the smallest number of blocking pairs (so is ''as stable as possible''). We show that this problem is NP-hard and not approximable within n^1^-^@e, for any @e>0, unless P=NP, where n is the number of men in I. Further, even if all preference lists are of length at most 3, we show that the problem remains NP-hard and not approximable within @d, for some @d>1. By contrast, we give a polynomial-time algorithm for the case where the preference lists of one sex are of length at most 2. We also extend these results to the cases where (i) preference lists may include ties, and (ii) we seek to minimize the number of agents involved in a blocking pair.