arXiv subjects
Publications and source records attributed to Ágnes Cseh.
The presented work focuses on problems from determinant theory, set theory and topology. The term graph is the binding element that connects these problems. Graphs are distinguished by their geometrical simplicity, which helps in showing the equivalence between various seemingly unrelated problems, besides providing solutions to several open questions discussed here.
We study the problem of partitioning a set of agents into coalitions based on the agents' additively separable preferences, which can also be viewed as a hedonic game. We apply three successively weaker solution concepts, namely envy-freeness, weakly justified envy-freeness, and justified envy-freeness. In a model in which coalitions may have any size, trivial solutions exist for these concepts, which provides a strong motivation for placing restrictions on coalition size. In this paper, we require feasible coalitions to have size three. We study the existence of partitions that are envy-free, weakly justified envy-free, and justified envy-free, and the computational complexity of finding such partitions, if they exist. We present a comprehensive complexity classification, in terms of the restrictions placed on the agents' preferences. From this, we identify a general trend that for the three successively weaker solution concepts, existence and polynomial-time solvability hold under successively weaker restrictions.
In the Popular Matching problem, we are given a bipartite graph $G = (A \cup B, E)$ and for each vertex $v\in A\cup B$, strict preferences over the neighbors of $v$. Given two matchings $M$ and $M'$, matching $M$ is more popular than $M'$ if the number of vertices preferring $M$ to $M'$ is larger than the number of vertices preferring $M'$ to $M$. A matching $M$ is called popular if there is no matching $M'$ that is more popular than $M$. We consider a natural generalization of Popular Matching where every vertex has a weight. Then, we call a matching $M$ more popular than matching $M'$ if the weight of vertices preferring $M$ to $M'$ is larger than the weight of vertices preferring $M'$ to $M$. For this case, we show that it is NP-hard to find a popular matching. Our main result its a polynomial-time algorithm that delivers a popular matching or a proof for it non-existence in instances where all vertices on one side have weight $c > 3$ and all vertices on the other side have weight 1.
The International Chess Federation (FIDE) imposes a voluminous and complex set of player pairing criteria in Swiss-system chess tournaments and endorses computer programs that are able to calculate the prescribed pairings. The purpose of these formalities is to ensure that players are paired fairly during the tournament and that the final ranking corresponds to the players' true strength order. We contest the official FIDE player pairing routine by presenting alternative pairing rules. These can be enforced by computing maximum weight matchings in a carefully designed graph. We demonstrate by extensive experiments that a tournament format using our mechanism 1) yields fairer pairings in the rounds of the tournament and 2) produces a final ranking that reflects the players' true strengths better than the state-of-the-art FIDE pairing system.
We study deviations by a group of agents in the three main types of matching markets: the house allocation, the marriage, and the roommates models. For a given instance, we call a matching $k$-stable if no other matching exists that is more beneficial to at least $k$ out of the $n$ agents. The concept generalizes the recently studied majority stability. We prove that whereas the verification of $k$-stability for a given matching is polynomial-time solvable in all three models, the complexity of deciding whether a $k$-stable matching exists depends on $\frac{k}{n}$ and is characteristic to each model.
In each round of a Swiss-system tournament, players of similar score are paired against each other. An intentional early loss therefore might lead to weaker opponents in later rounds and thus to a better final tournament result - a phenomenon known as the Swiss Gambit. To the best of our knowledge it is an open question whether this strategy can actually work. This paper provides answers based on an empirical agent-based analysis for the most prominent application area of the Swiss-system format, namely chess tournaments. We simulate realistic tournaments by employing the official FIDE pairing system for computing the player pairings in each round. We show that even though gambits are widely possible in Swiss-system chess tournaments, profiting from them requires a high degree of predictability of match results. Moreover, even if a Swiss Gambit succeeds, the obtained improvement in the final ranking is limited. Our experiments prove that counting on a Swiss Gambit is indeed a lot more of a risky gambit than a reliable strategy to improve the final rank.
In a graph where vertices have preferences over their neighbors, a matching is called popular if it does not lose a head-to-head election against any other matching when the vertices vote between the matchings. Popular matchings can be seen as an intermediate category between stable matchings and maximum-size matchings. In this paper, we aim to maximize the utility of a matching that is popular but admits only a few blocking edges. For general graphs already finding a popular matching with at most one blocking edge is NP-complete. For bipartite instances, we study the problem of finding a maximum-utility popular matching with a bound on the number (or more generally, the cost) of blocking edges applying a multivariate approach. We show classical and parameterized hardness results for severely restricted instances. By contrast, we design an algorithm for instances where preferences on one side admit a master list, and show that this algorithm is optimal.
The input of the popular roommates problem consists of a graph $G = (V, E)$ and for each vertex $v\in V$, strict preferences over the neighbors of $v$. Matching $M$ is more popular than $M'$ if the number of vertices preferring $M$ to $M'$ is larger than the number of vertices preferring $M'$ to $M$. A matching $M$ is called popular if there is no matching $M'$ that is more popular than $M$. Only recently Faenza et al. and Gupta et al. resolved the long-standing open question on the complexity of deciding whether a popular matching exists in a popular roommates instance and showed that the problem is NP-complete. In this paper we identify a class of instances that admit a polynomial-time algorithm for the problem. We also test these theoretical findings on randomly generated instances to determine the existence probability of a popular matching in them.
In the house allocation problem with lower and upper quotas, we are given a set of applicants and a set of projects. Each applicant has a strictly ordered preference list over the projects, while the projects are equipped with a lower and an upper quota. A feasible matching assigns the applicants to the projects in such a way that a project is either matched to no applicant or to a number of applicants between its lower and upper quota. In this model we study two classic optimality concepts: Pareto optimality and popularity. We show that finding a popular matching is hard even if the maximum lower quota is 2 and that finding a perfect Pareto optimal matching, verifying Pareto optimality, and verifying popularity are all NP-complete even if the maximum lower quota is 3. We complement the last three negative results by showing that the problems become polynomial-time solvable when the maximum lower quota is 2, thereby answering two open questions of Cechlárová and Fleiner. Finally, we also study the parameterized complexity of all four mentioned problems.
Two actively researched problem settings in matchings under preferences are popular matchings and the three-dimensional stable matching problem with cyclic preferences. In this paper, we apply the optimality notion of the first topic to the input characteristics of the second one. We investigate the connection between stability, popularity, and their strict variants, strong stability and strong popularity in three-dimensional instances with cyclic preferences. Furthermore, we also derive results on the complexity of these problems when the preferences are derived from master lists.
The Young Physicists Tournament is an established team-oriented scientific competition between high school students from 37 countries on 5 continents. The competition consists of scientific discussions called Fights. Three or four teams participate in each Fight, each of whom presents a problem while rotating the roles of Presenter, Opponent, Reviewer, and Observer among them. The rules of a few countries require that each team announce in advance 3 problems they will present at the national tournament. The task of the organizers is to choose the composition of Fights in such a way that each team presents each of its chosen problems exactly once and within a single Fight no problem is presented more than once. Besides formalizing these feasibility conditions, in this paper we formulate several additional fairness conditions for tournament schedules. We show that the fulfillment of some of them can be ensured by constructing suitable edge colorings in bipartite graphs. To find fair schedules, we propose integer linear programs and test them on real as well as randomly generated data.
Multi-robot task allocation is one of the most fundamental classes of problems in robotics and is crucial for various real-world robotic applications such as search, rescue and area exploration. We consider the Single-Task robots and Multi-Robot tasks Instantaneous Assignment (ST-MR-IA) setting where each task requires at least a certain number of robots and each robot can work on at most one task and incurs an operational cost for each task. Our aim is to consider a natural computational problem of allocating robots to complete the maximum number of tasks subject to budget constraints. We consider budget constraints of three different kinds: (1) total budget, (2) task budget, and (3) robot budget. We provide a detailed complexity analysis including results on approximations as well as polynomial-time algorithms for the general setting and important restricted settings.
Our input is a complete graph $G = (V,E)$ on $n$ vertices where each vertex has a strict ranking of all other vertices in $G$. Our goal is to construct a matching in $G$ that is popular. A matching $M$ is popular if $M$ does not lose a head-to-head election against any matching $M'$, where each vertex casts a vote for the matching in $\{M,M'\}$ where it gets assigned a better partner. The popular matching problem is to decide whether a popular matching exists or not. The popular matching problem in $G$ is easy to solve for odd $n$. Surprisingly, the problem becomes NP-hard for even $n$, as we show here.
In the stable marriage problem, a set of men and a set of women are given, each of whom has a strictly ordered preference list over the acceptable agents in the opposite class. A matching is called stable if it is not blocked by any pair of agents, who mutually prefer each other to their respective partner. Ties in the preferences allow for three different definitions for a stable matching: weak, strong and super-stability. Besides this, acceptable pairs in the instance can be restricted in their ability of blocking a matching or being part of it, which again generates three categories of restrictions on acceptable pairs. Forced pairs must be in a stable matching, forbidden pairs must not appear in it, and lastly, free pairs cannot block any matching. Our computational complexity study targets the existence of a stable solution for each of the three stability definitions, in the presence of each of the three types of restricted pairs. We solve all cases that were still open. As a byproduct, we also derive that the maximum size weakly stable matching problem is hard even in very dense graphs, which may be of independent interest.
We tackle the problem of partitioning players into groups of fixed size, such as allocating eligible students to shared dormitory rooms. Each student submits preferences over the other individual students. We study several settings, which differ in the size of the rooms to be filled, the orderedness or completeness of the preferences, and the way of calculating the value of a coalition---based on the best or worst roommate in the coalition. In all cases, we determine the complexity of deciding the existence, and then finding a Pareto optimal assignment, and the complexity of verifying Pareto optimality for a given assignment.
Stable flows generalize the well-known concept of stable matchings to markets in which transactions may involve several agents, forwarding flow from one to another. An instance of the problem consists of a capacitated directed network, in which vertices express their preferences over their incident edges. A network flow is stable if there is no group of vertices that all could benefit from rerouting the flow along a walk. Fleiner established that a stable flow always exists by reducing it to the stable allocation problem. We present an augmenting-path algorithm for computing a stable flow, the first algorithm that achieves polynomial running time for this problem without using stable allocation as a black-box subroutine. We further consider the problem of finding a stable flow such that the flow value on every edge is within a given interval. For this problem, we present an elegant graph transformation and based on this, we devise a simple and fast algorithm, which also can be used to find a solution to the stable marriage problem with forced and forbidden edges. Finally, we study the stable multicommodity flow model introduced by Király and Pap. The original model is highly involved and allows for commodity-dependent preference lists at the vertices and commodity-specific edge capacities. We present several graph-based reductions that show equivalence to a significantly simpler model. We further show that it is NP-complete to decide whether an integral solution exists.
We study the classical, two-sided stable marriage problem under pairwise preferences. In the most general setting, agents are allowed to express their preferences as comparisons of any two of their edges and they also have the right to declare a draw or even withdraw from such a comparison. This freedom is then gradually restricted as we specify six stages of orderedness in the preferences, ending with the classical case of strictly ordered lists. We study all cases occurring when combining the three known notions of stability---weak, strong and super-stability---under the assumption that each side of the bipartite market obtains one of the six degrees of orderedness. By designing three polynomial algorithms and two NP-completeness proofs we determine the complexity of all cases not yet known, and thus give an exact boundary in terms of preference structure between tractable and intractable cases.
An unceasing problem of our prevailing society is the fair division of goods. The problem of proportional cake cutting focuses on dividing a heterogeneous and divisible resource, the cake, among $n$ players who value pieces according to their own measure function. The goal is to assign each player a not necessarily connected part of the cake that the player evaluates at least as much as her proportional share. In this paper, we investigate the problem of proportional division with unequal shares, where each player is entitled to receive a predetermined portion of the cake. Our main contribution is threefold. First we present a protocol for integer demands that delivers a proportional solution in fewer queries than all known algorithms. Then we show that our protocol is asymptotically the fastest possible by giving a matching lower bound. Finally, we turn to irrational demands and solve the proportional cake cutting problem by reducing it to the same problem with integer demands only. All results remain valid in a highly general cake cutting model, which can be of independent interest.