Pareto Optimal Allocation under Uncertain Preferences

The assignment problem is one of the most well-studied settings in social choice, matching, and discrete allocation. We consider the problem with the additional feature that agents' preferences involve uncertainty. The setting with uncertainty leads to a number of interesting questions including the following ones. How to compute an assignment with the highest probability of being Pareto optimal? What is the complexity of computing the probability that a given assignment is Pareto optimal? Does there exist an assignment that is Pareto optimal with probability one? We consider these problems under two natural uncertainty models: (1) the lottery model in which each agent has an independent probability distribution over linear orders and (2) the joint probability model that involves a joint probability distribution over preference profiles. For both of the models, we present a number of algorithmic and complexity results.Comment: Preliminary Draft; new results & new author

Counting Houses of Pareto Optimal Matchings in the House Allocation Problem

Let $A,B$ with $|A| = m$ and $|B| = n\ge m$ be two sets. We assume that every element $a\in A$ has a reference list over all elements from $B$. We call an injective mapping $\tau$ from $A$ to $B$ a matching. A blocking coalition of $\tau$ is a subset $A'$ of $A$ such that there exists a matching $\tau'$ that differs from $\tau$ only on elements of $A'$, and every element of $A'$ improves in $\tau'$, compared to $\tau$ according to its preference list. If there exists no blocking coalition, we call the matching $\tau$ an exchange stable matching (ESM). An element $b\in B$ is reachable if there exists an exchange stable matching using $b$. The set of all reachable elements is denoted by $E^*$. We show $$|E^*| \leq \sum_{i = 1,\ldots, m}{\left\lfloor\frac{m}{i}\right\rfloor} = \Theta(m\log m).$$ This is asymptotically tight. A set $E\subseteq B$ is reachable (respectively exactly reachable) if there exists an exchange stable matching $\tau$ whose image contains $E$ as a subset (respectively equals $E$). We give bounds for the number of exactly reachable sets. We find that our results hold in the more general setting of multi-matchings, when each element $a$ of $A$ is matched with $\ell_a$ elements of $B$ instead of just one. Further, we give complexity results and algorithms for corresponding algorithmic questions. Finally, we characterize unavoidable elements, i.e., elements of $B$ that are used by all ESM's. This yields efficient algorithms to determine all unavoidable elements.Comment: 24 pages 2 Figures revise

Fair assignment of indivisible objects under ordinal preferences

We consider the discrete assignment problem in which agents express ordinal preferences over objects and these objects are allocated to the agents in a fair manner. We use the stochastic dominance relation between fractional or randomized allocations to systematically define varying notions of proportionality and envy-freeness for discrete assignments. The computational complexity of checking whether a fair assignment exists is studied for these fairness notions. We also characterize the conditions under which a fair assignment is guaranteed to exist. For a number of fairness concepts, polynomial-time algorithms are presented to check whether a fair assignment exists. Our algorithmic results also extend to the case of unequal entitlements of agents. Our NP-hardness result, which holds for several variants of envy-freeness, answers an open question posed by Bouveret, Endriss, and Lang (ECAI 2010). We also propose fairness concepts that always suggest a non-empty set of assignments with meaningful fairness properties. Among these concepts, optimal proportionality and optimal weak proportionality appear to be desirable fairness concepts.Comment: extended version of a paper presented at AAMAS 201

A Generalization of the AL method for Fair Allocation of Indivisible Objects

We consider the assignment problem in which agents express ordinal preferences over $m$ objects and the objects are allocated to the agents based on the preferences. In a recent paper, Brams, Kilgour, and Klamler (2014) presented the AL method to compute an envy-free assignment for two agents. The AL method crucially depends on the assumption that agents have strict preferences over objects. We generalize the AL method to the case where agents may express indifferences and prove the axiomatic properties satisfied by the algorithm. As a result of the generalization, we also get a $O(m)$ speedup on previous algorithms to check whether a complete envy-free assignment exists or not. Finally, we show that unless P=NP, there can be no polynomial-time extension of GAL to the case of arbitrary number of agents

Size versus fairness in the assignment problem

When not all objects are acceptable to all agents, maximizing the number of objects actually assigned is an important design concern. We compute the guaranteed size ratio of the Probabilistic Serial mechanism, i.e., the worst ratio of the actual expected size to the maximal feasible size. It converges decreasingly to 1 − 1 e 63.2% as the maximal size increases. It is the best ratio of any Envy-Free assignment mechanism

"Almost-stable" matchings in the Hospitals / Residents problem with Couples

The Hospitals / Residents problem with Couples (hrc) models the allocation of intending junior doctors to hospitals where couples are allowed to submit joint preference lists over pairs of (typically geographically close) hospitals. It is known that a stable matching need not exist, so we consider min bp hrc, the problem of finding a matching that admits the minimum number of blocking pairs (i.e., is “as stable as possible”). We show that this problem is NP-hard and difficult to approximate even in the highly restricted case that each couple finds only one hospital pair acceptable. However if we further assume that the preference list of each single resident and hospital is of length at most 2, we give a polynomial-time algorithm for this case. We then present the first Integer Programming (IP) and Constraint Programming (CP) models for min bp hrc. Finally, we discuss an empirical evaluation of these models applied to randomly-generated instances of min bp hrc. We find that on average, the CP model is about 1.15 times faster than the IP model, and when presolving is applied to the CP model, it is on average 8.14 times faster. We further observe that the number of blocking pairs admitted by a solution is very small, i.e., usually at most 1, and never more than 2, for the (28,000) instances considered