SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2501.18442

Stable Marriage: Loyalty vs. Competition

Abstract

We consider the stable matching problem (e.g. between doctors and hospitals) in a one-to-one matching setting, where preferences are drawn uniformly at random. It is known that when doctors propose and the number of doctors equals the number of hospitals, then the expected rank of doctors for their match is $\Theta(\log n)$, while the expected rank of the hospitals for their match is $\Theta(n/\log n)$, where $n$ is the size of each side of the market. However, when adding even a single doctor, [Ashlagi, Kanoria and Leshno, 2017] show that the tables have turned: doctors have expected rank of $\Theta(n/\log n)$ while hospitals have expected rank of $\Theta(\log n)$. That is, (slight) competition has a much more dramatically harmful effect than the benefit of being on the proposing side. Motivated by settings where agents inflate their value for an item if it is already allocated to them (termed endowment effect), we study the case where hospitals exhibit ``loyalty". We model loyalty as a parameter $k$, where a hospital currently matched to their $\ell$th most preferred doctor accepts proposals from their $\ell-k-1$th most preferred doctors. Hospital loyalty should help doctors mitigate the harmful effect of competition, as many more outcomes are now stable. However, we show that the effect of competition is so dramatic that, even in settings with extremely high loyalty, in unbalanced markets, the expected rank of doctors already becomes $\tilde{\Theta}(\sqrt{n})$ for loyalty $k=n-\sqrt{n}\log n=n(1-o(1))$.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Amit Ronen, Jonah Evan Hess, Yael Belfer, Simon Mauras, Alon Eden. 2025-01-30. Stable Marriage: Loyalty vs. Competition. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18442

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT