IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1910.04401.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Representing All Stable Matchings by Walking a Maximal Chain

Author

Listed:
  • Linda Cai
  • Clayton Thomas

Abstract

The seminal book of Gusfield and Irving [GI89] provides a compact and algorithmically useful way to represent the collection of stable matches corresponding to a given set of preferences. In this paper, we reinterpret the main results of [GI89], giving a new proof of the characterization which is able to bypass a lot of the "theory building" of the original works. We also provide a streamlined and efficient way to compute this representation. Our proofs and algorithms emphasize the connection to well-known properties of the deferred acceptance algorithm.

Suggested Citation

  • Linda Cai & Clayton Thomas, 2019. "Representing All Stable Matchings by Walking a Maximal Chain," Papers 1910.04401, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1910.04401
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1910.04401
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Itai Ashlagi & Yash Kanoria & Jacob D. Leshno, 2017. "Unbalanced Random Matching Markets: The Stark Effect of Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(1), pages 69-98.
    2. Ashlagi, Itai & Gonczarowski, Yannai A., 2018. "Stable matching mechanisms are not obviously strategy-proof," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 405-425.
    3. Boris Pittel, 2019. "On Likely Solutions of the Stable Matching Problem with Unequal Numbers of Men and Women," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(1), pages 122-146, February.
    4. Gonczarowski, Yannai A. & Nisan, Noam & Ostrovsky, Rafail & Rosenbaum, Will, 2019. "A stable marriage requires communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 626-647.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Clayton Thomas, 2024. "Priority-Neutral Matching Lattices Are Not Distributive," Papers 2404.02142, arXiv.org.
    2. Yannai A. Gonczarowski & Clayton Thomas, 2022. "Structural Complexities of Matching Mechanisms," Papers 2212.08709, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yannai A. Gonczarowski & Ori Heffetz & Clayton Thomas, 2022. "Strategyproofness-Exposing Mechanism Descriptions," Papers 2209.13148, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    2. Yannai A. Gonczarowski & Clayton Thomas, 2022. "Structural Complexities of Matching Mechanisms," Papers 2212.08709, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    3. Gonczarowski, Yannai A. & Nisan, Noam & Ostrovsky, Rafail & Rosenbaum, Will, 2019. "A stable marriage requires communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 626-647.
    4. Itai Ashlagi & Mark Braverman & Geng Zhao, 2023. "Welfare Distribution in Two-sided Random Matching Markets," Papers 2302.08599, arXiv.org.
    5. Itai Ashlagi & Mark Braverman & Amin Saberi & Clayton Thomas & Geng Zhao, 2020. "Tiered Random Matching Markets: Rank is Proportional to Popularity," Papers 2009.05124, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2021.
    6. Mohammad Akbarpour & Yeganeh Alimohammadi & Shengwu Li & Amin Saberi, 2021. "The Value of Excess Supply in Spatial Matching Markets," Papers 2104.03219, arXiv.org.
    7. Ashlagi, Itai & Nikzad, Afshin, 2020. "What matters in school choice tie-breaking? How competition guides design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    8. Kenny Peng & Nikhil Garg, 2024. "Wisdom and Foolishness of Noisy Matching Markets," Papers 2402.16771, arXiv.org.
    9. Pablo Guillen & Róbert F. Veszteg, 2021. "Strategy-proofness in experimental matching markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 650-668, June.
    10. Catonini, Emiliano & Xue, Jingyi, 2020. "Local Dominance," Economics and Statistics Working Papers 1-2021, Singapore Management University, School of Economics.
      • Emiliano Catonini & Jingyi Xue, 2020. "Local Dominance," Papers 2012.14432, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    11. Michael Bates & Michael Dinerstein & Andrew C. Johnston & Isaac Sorkin, 2022. "Teacher Labor Market Equilibrium and Student Achievement," CESifo Working Paper Series 9551, CESifo.
    12. Michael Greinecker & Christopher Kah, 2018. "Pairwise stable matching in large economies," Graz Economics Papers 2018-01, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    13. Breitmoser, Yves & Schweighofer-Kodritsch, Sebastian, 2019. "Obviousness around the clock," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2019-203, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    14. Arribillaga, R. Pablo & Massó, Jordi & Neme, Alejandro, 2023. "All sequential allotment rules are obviously strategy-proof," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(3), July.
    15. Marek Pycia & Peter Troyan, 2023. "A Theory of Simplicity in Games and Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(4), pages 1495-1526, July.
    16. Saraiva, Gustavo, 2021. "An improved bound to manipulation in large stable matches," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 55-77.
    17. Ortega, Josué & Klein, Thilo, 2022. "Improving Efficiency and Equality in School Choice," QBS Working Paper Series 2022/02, Queen's University Belfast, Queen's Business School.
    18. Ortega, Josué, 2018. "Social integration in two-sided matching markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 119-126.
    19. Andrew Komo & Scott Duke Kominers & Tim Roughgarden, 2024. "Shill-Proof Auctions," Papers 2404.00475, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2024.
    20. Suat Evren, 2023. "Social Surplus Maximization in Sponsored Search Auctions Requires Communication," Papers 2305.07729, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1910.04401. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.