Because preferences naturally arise and play an important role in many real-life decisions, they are at the backbone of various fields. In particular preferences are increasingly used in almost all matching procedures-based applications. In this work we highlight the benefit of using AI insights on preferences in a large scale application, namely the French Admission Post-Baccalaureat Platform (APB). Each year APB allocates hundreds of thousands first year applicants to universities. This is done automatically by matching applicants preferences to university seats. In practice, APB can be unable to distinguish between applicants which leads to the introduction of random selection. This has created frustration in the French public since randomness, even used as a last mean does not fare well with the republican egalitarian principle. In this work, we provide a solution to this problem. We take advantage of recent AI Preferences Theory results to show how to enhance APB in order to improve expressiveness of applicants preferences and reduce their exposure to random decisions.
The Stable Marriage problem is based on a very general notion of stability which corresponds to allocations where no individuals can discern any gain from further trade. It became central in cooperative game theory and found applications in a variety of important real-life scenarios @cite_24 @cite_25 . As a recognition of this large impact, the 2012 Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded to Lloyd S. Shapley and Alvin E. Roth .
@cite_24 @cite_25
2117063032 2084501762
Preface 1. Introduction to the Shapley value Alvin E. Roth Part I. Ancestral Papers: 2. A value for n-person games Lloyd S. Shapley 3. A method for evaluating the distribution of power in a committee system Lloyd S. Shapley and Martin Shubik Part II. Reformulation and Generalizations: 4. The expected utility of playing a game Alvin E. Roth 5. The Shapley-Shubik and Banzhaf power indices as probabilities Philip D. Straffin, Jr. 6. Weighted Shapley values Ehud Kalai and Dov Samet 7. Probabilistic values for games Robert James Weber 8. Combinatorial representations of the Shapley value based on average relative payoffs Uriel G. Rothblum 9. The potential of the Shapley value Sergiu Hart and Andreu Mas-Colell 10. Multilinear extensions of games Guillermo Owen Part III. Coalitions: 11. Coalitional value Mordecai Kurz 12. Endogenous formation of links between players and the coalitions: an application of the Shapley value Robert J. Aumann and Roger B. Myerson Part IV. Large Games: 13. Values of large finite games Myrna Holtz Wooders and William R. Zame 14. Payoffs in nonatomic economics: an axiomatic approach Pradeep Dubley and Abraham Neyman 15. Values of smooth nonatomic games: the method of multilinear approximation Dov Monderer and Abraham Neyman 16. Nondifferentiable TU markets: the value Jean-Francois Mertens Part V. Cost Allocation and Fair Division: 17. Individual contribution and just compensation H. P. Young 18. The Aumann-Shapley prices: a survey Yair Tauman Part VI. NTU Games: 19. Utility comparison and the theory of games Lloyd S. Shapley 20. Paths leading to the Nash set Michael Maschler, Guillermo Owen and Bezalel Peleg. A cooperative game in characteristic-function form is obtained by allowing a number of individuals to esercise partial control over the constraints of a (generally nonlinear) mathematical programming problem, either directly or through committee voting. Conditions are imposed on the functions defining the programming problem and the control system which suffice to make the game totally balanced. This assures a nonempty core and hence a stable allocation of the full value of the programming problem among the controlling palyers. In the linear case the core is closely related to the solutions of the dual problem. Applications are made to a variety of economic models, including the transferable utility trading economies of Shapley and Shubik and a multishipper one-commodity transshipment model with convex cost functions and concave revenue functions. Dropping the assumption of transferable utility leads to a class of controlled multiobjective or ‘Pareto programming’ problems, which again yield totally balanced games. 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 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. Preference aggregation is used in a variety of multiagent applications, and as a result, voting theory has become an important topic in multiagent system research. However, power indices (which reflect how much "real power" a voter has in a weighted voting system) have received relatively little attention, although they have long been studied in political science and economics. We consider a particular multiagent domain, a threshold network flow game. Agents control the edges of a graph; a coalition wins if it can send a flow that exceeds a given threshold from a source vertex to a target vertex. The relative power of each edge agent reflects its significance in enabling such a flow, and in real-world networks could be used, for example, to allocate resources for maintaining parts of the network. We examine the computational complexity of calculating two prominent power indices, the Banzhaf index and the Shapley-Shubik index, in this network flow domain. We also consider the complexity of calculating the core in this domain. The core can be used to allocate, in a stable manner, the gains of the coalition that is established. We show that calculating the Shapley-Shubik index in this network flow domain is NP-hard, and that calculating the Banzhaf index is #P-complete. Despite these negative results, we show that for some restricted network flow domains there exists a polynomial algorithm for calculating agents' Banzhaf power indices. We also show that computing the core in this game can be performed in polynomial time. In any two-sided matching market, a stable matching can be found by a central agency using the deferred acceptance procedure of Gale and Shapley. But if the market is decentralized and information is incomplete then stability of the ensuing matching is not to be expected. Despite the prevalence of such matching situations, and the importance of stability, little theory exists concerning instability. We discuss various measures of instability and analyze how they interact with the structure of the underlying preferences. Our main result is that even the outcome of decentralized matching with incomplete information can be expected to be “almost stable” under reasonable assumptions. Abstract : A two sided matching model is a game in which there are two types of agents, and the essential coalitions are singletons and doubletons containing one agent of each type. Over the years, they have become an important part of economic theory. One reason for this is that they have been deemed worthy models of economic markets with indivisible goods. Gale and Shapley modeled college admissions as a matching market. Shapley and Shubik adopted a similar model for their housing market. Crawford and Knoer defined labor markets in these terms. In all of these instances, the relevant solution concept is that of the core which is the set of economic allocations where no coalition of agents can improve their lot on their own. Herein lies another reason for the study of these games; the fact that their cores have many nice properties. For instance, their cores are always nonempty. Much of the literature relate relatively simple algorithms which calculate core points. Another important idea is that in some of these games, the core and the set of economic equilibria are equivalent and both are generally sets of positive measure. This contrasts other economic models (with completely divisible goods) in which the set of equilibria is a proper subset of the core and is of measure zero. Thus, given a sets of agents' preferences, there is usually some latitude in choosing equilibrium prices. Intuitively, the amount of flexibility would be measured by the core's volume. This paper quantifies this last notion in the setting of Shapley and Shubik's housing market. Network design is a fundamental problem for which it is important to understand the effects of strategic behavior. Given a collection of self-interested agents who want to form a network connecting certain endpoints, the set of stable solutions—the Nash equilibria—may look quite different from the centrally enforced optimum. We study the quality of the best Nash equilibrium, and refer to the ratio of its cost to the optimum network cost as the price of stability. The best Nash equilibrium solution has a natural meaning of stability in this context—it is the optimal solution that can be proposed from which no user will defect. We consider the price of stability for network design with respect to one of the most widely studied protocols for network cost allocation, in which the cost of each edge is divided equally between users whose connections make use of it; this fair-division scheme can be derived from the Shapley value and has a number of basic economic motivations. We show that the price of stability for network design with respect to this fair cost allocation is @math , where @math is the number of users, and that a good Nash equilibrium can be achieved via best-response dynamics in which users iteratively defect from a starting solution. This establishes that the fair cost allocation protocol is in fact a useful mechanism for inducing strategic behavior to form near-optimal equilibria. We discuss connections to the class of potential games defined by Monderer and Shapley, and extend our results to cases in which users are seeking to balance network design costs with latencies in the constructed network, with stronger results when the network has only delays and no construction costs. We also present bounds on the convergence time of best-response dynamics, and discuss extensions to a weighted game. The purpose of this paper is to study the fundamental mechanism, humans use in argumentation, and to explore ways to implement this mechanism on computers. We do so by first developing a theory for argumentation whose central notion is the acceptability of arguments. Then we argue for the “correctness” or “appropriateness” of our theory with two strong arguments. The first one shows that most of the major approaches to nonmonotonic reasoning in AI and logic programming are special forms of our theory of argumentation. The second argument illustrates how our theory can be used to investigate the logical structure of many practical problems. This argument is based on a result showing that our theory captures naturally the solutions of the theory of n-person games and of the well-known stable marriage problem. By showing that argumentation can be viewed as a special form of logic programming with negation as failure, we introduce a general logic-programming-based method for generating meta-interpreters for argumentation systems, a method very much similar to the compiler-compiler idea in conventional programming. Keyword: Argumentation; Nonmonotonic reasoning; Logic programming; n-person games; The stable marriage problem One key question in cooperative game theory is that of coalitional stability. A coalition in such games is stable when no subset of the agents in it has a rational incentive to leave the coalition. Finding a division of the gains of the coalition (an imputation) lies at the heart of many cooperative game theory solution concepts, the most prominent of which is the core. However, some coalitional games have empty cores, and any imputation in such a game is unstable. We investigate the possibility of stabilizing the coalitional structure using external payments. In this case, a supplemental payment is offered to the grand coalition by an external party which is interested in having the members of the coalition work together. The sum of this payment plus the gains of the coalition, called the coalition's "adjusted gains", may be divided among the members of the coalition in a stable manner. We call a division of the adjusted gains a super-imputation, and define the cost of stability (CoS) as the minimal sum of payments that stabilizes the coalition. We examine the cost of stability in weighted voting games, where each agent has a weight, and a coalition is successful if the sum of its weights exceeds a given threshold. Such games offer a simple model of decision making in political bodies, and of cooperation in multiagent settings. We show that it is coNP-complete to test whether a super-imputation is stable, but show that if either the weights or payments of agents are bounded then there exists a polynomial algorithm for this problem. We provide a polynomial approximation algorithm for computing the cost of stability. Active consumer participation is seen as an integral part of the emerging smart grid. Examples include demand-side management programs, incorporation of consumer-owned energy storage or renewable energy units, and active energy trading. However, despite the foreseen technological benefits of such consumer-centric grid features, to date, their widespread adoption in practice remains modest. To shed light on this challenge, this paper explores the potential of prospect theory, a Nobel-prize winning theory, as a decision-making framework that can help understand how risk and uncertainty can impact the decisions of smart grid consumers. After introducing the basic notions of prospect theory, several examples drawn from a number of smart grid applications are developed. These results show that a better understanding of the role of human decision-making within the smart grid is paramount for optimizing its operation and expediting the deployment of its various technologies. Stanford Moore, William Stein, and Anfinsen were awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1972 for "their contribution to the understanding of the connection between chemical structure and catalytic activity of the active center of the ribonuclease molecule." In his Nobel Lecture, Anfinsen provided a sketch of the rich history of research that provided the foundation for his work on protein folding and the "Thermodynamic Hypothesis," and outlined potential avenues of current and future scientific exploration. The stable marriage problem, i.e., the problem of assigning the members of two disjoint sets to one another is extended to the case in which individual preferences are represented by weak orderings instead of linear orderings. This leads to a more natural solution for such problems as the processing of college admissions and the optimal distribution of personnel. The paper begins with a formal definition of an assignments function and introduces conditions on it, among them stability. It is shown how the Gale and Shapley algorithm for finding stable assignments can be extended to the more general case considered here. It is shown that if there is an assignment which is preferred by a majority to all other assignments, then this assignment is necessarily stable. Moreover, in a situation where all preference orders are linear orders, all stable assignments are majority assignments. Historically, papers have been physically bound to the journal in which they were published; but in the digital age papers are available individually, no longer tied to their respective journals. Hence, papers now can be read and cited based on their own merits, independently of the journal's physical availability, reputation, or impact factor (IF). We compare the strength of the relationship between journals' IFs and the actual citations received by their respective papers from 1902 to 2009. Throughout most of the 20th century, papers' citation rates were increasingly linked to their respective journals' IFs. However, since 1990, the advent of the digital age, the relation between IFs and paper citations has been weakening. This began first in physics, a field that was quick to make the transition into the electronic domain. Furthermore, since 1990 the overall proportion of highly cited papers coming from highly cited journals has been decreasing and, of these highly cited papers, the proportion not coming from highly cited journals has been increasing. Should this pattern continue, it might bring an end to the use of the IF as a way to evaluate the quality of journals, papers, and researchers. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Social life coalesces into communities through cooperation and conflict. As a case in point, Shwed and Bearman (2010) studied consensus and contention in scientific communities. They used a sophisticated modularity method to detect communities on the basis of scientific citations, which they then interpreted as directed positive network ties. They assumed that a lack of citations implies disagreement. Some scientific citations, however, are contentious and should therefore be represented by negative ties, like conflicting relations in general. After expanding the modularity method to incorporate negative ties, we show that a small proportion of negative ties, commonly present in science, is sufficient to significantly alter the community structure. In addition, our research suggests that without distinguishing negative ties, scientific communities actually represent specialized subfields, not contentious groups. Finally, we cast doubt on the assumption that lack of cites would signal disagreement. To show the general importance of discerning negative ties for understanding conflict and its impact on communities, we also analyze a public debate. A key question in cooperative game theory is that of coalitional stability, usually captured by the notion of the core --the set of outcomes such that no subgroup of players has an incentive to deviate. However, some coalitional games have empty cores, and any outcome in such a game is unstable. In this paper, we investigate the possibility of stabilizing a coalitional game by using external payments. We consider a scenario where an external party, which is interested in having the players work together, offers a supplemental payment to the grand coalition (or, more generally, a particular coalition structure). This payment is conditional on players not deviating from their coalition(s). The sum of this payment plus the actual gains of the coalition(s) may then be divided among the agents so as to promote stability. We define the cost of stability (CoS) as the minimal external payment that stabilizes the game. We provide general bounds on the cost of stability in several classes of games, and explore its algorithmic properties. To develop a better intuition for the concepts we introduce, we provide a detailed algorithmic study of the cost of stability in weighted voting games, a simple but expressive class of games which can model decision-making in political bodies, and cooperation in multiagent settings. Finally, we extend our model and results to games with coalition structures. 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. 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. 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 . We describe a fixed-point based approach to the theory of bipartite stable matchings. By this, we provide a common framework that links together seemingly distant results, like the stable marriage theorem of Gale and Shapley, the Mendelsohn-Dulmage theorem, the Kundu-Lawler theorem, Tarski's fixed-point theorem, the Cantor-Bernstein theorem, Pym's linking theorem, or the monochromatic path theorem of In this framework, we formulate a matroid-generalization of the stable marriage theorem and study the lattice structure of generalized stable matchings. Based on the theory of lattice polyhedra and blocking polyhedra, we extend results of Vande Vate and Rothblum on the bipartite stable matching polytope.