On complexity of special maximum matchings constructing

For bipartite graphs the NP-completeness is proved for the problem of existence of maximum matching which removal leads to a graph with given lower(upper)bound for the cardinality of its maximum matching.Comment: 12 pages, 8 figures. Discrete Mathematics, to appea

Matching under Preferences

Matching theory studies how agents and/or objects from different sets can be matched with each other while taking agents\u2019 preferences into account. The theory originated in 1962 with a celebrated paper by David Gale and Lloyd Shapley (1962), in which they proposed the Stable Marriage Algorithm as a solution to the problem of two-sided matching. Since then, this theory has been successfully applied to many real-world problems such as matching students to universities, doctors to hospitals, kidney transplant patients to donors, and tenants to houses. This chapter will focus on algorithmic as well as strategic issues of matching theory. Many large-scale centralized allocation processes can be modelled by matching problems where agents have preferences over one another. For example, in China, over 10 million students apply for admission to higher education annually through a centralized process. The inputs to the matching scheme include the students\u2019 preferences over universities, and vice versa, and the capacities of each university. The task is to construct a matching that is in some sense optimal with respect to these inputs. Economists have long understood the problems with decentralized matching markets, which can suffer from such undesirable properties as unravelling, congestion and exploding offers (see Roth and Xing, 1994, for details). For centralized markets, constructing allocations by hand for large problem instances is clearly infeasible. Thus centralized mechanisms are required for automating the allocation process. Given the large number of agents typically involved, the computational efficiency of a mechanism's underlying algorithm is of paramount importance. Thus we seek polynomial-time algorithms for the underlying matching problems. Equally important are considerations of strategy: an agent (or a coalition of agents) may manipulate their input to the matching scheme (e.g., by misrepresenting their true preferences or underreporting their capacity) in order to try to improve their outcome. A desirable property of a mechanism is strategyproofness, which ensures that it is in the best interests of an agent to behave truthfully

Popular matchings

We consider the problem of matching a set of applicants to a set of posts, where each applicant has a preference list, ranking a non-empty subset of posts in order of preference, possibly involving ties. We say that a matching M is popular if there is no matching M' such that the number of applicants preferring M' to M exceeds the number of applicants preferring M to M'. In this paper, we give the first polynomial-time algorithms to determine if an instance admits a popular matching, and to find a largest such matching, if one exists. For the special case in which every preference list is strictly ordered (i.e. contains no ties), we give an O(n+m) time algorithm, where n is the total number of applicants and posts, and m is the total length of all the preference lists. For the general case in which preference lists may contain ties, we give an O(√nm) time algorithm, and show that the problem has equivalent time complexity to the maximum-cardinality bipartite matching problem

The stable roommates problem with globally-ranked pairs

We introduce a restriction of the stable roommates problem in which roommate pairs are ranked globally. In contrast to the unrestricted problem, weakly stable matchings are guaranteed to exist, and additionally, they can be found in polynomial time. However, it is still the case that strongly stable matchings may not exist, and so we consider the complexity of finding weakly stable matchings with various desirable properties. In particular, we present a polynomial-time algorithm to find a rank-maximal (weakly stable) matching. This is the first generalization of an algorithm due to [Irving et al. 06] to a nonbipartite setting. Also, we describe several hardness results in an even more restricted setting for each of the problems of finding weakly stable matchings that are of maximum size, are egalitarian, have minimum regret, and admit the minimum number of weakly blocking pairs

Hardness of Exact Distance Queries in Sparse Graphs Through Hub Labeling

A distance labeling scheme is an assignment of bit-labels to the vertices of an undirected, unweighted graph such that the distance between any pair of vertices can be decoded solely from their labels. An important class of distance labeling schemes is that of hub labelings, where a node $v \in G$ stores its distance to the so-called hubs $S_v \subseteq V$, chosen so that for any $u,v \in V$ there is $w \in S_u \cap S_v$ belonging to some shortest $uv$ path. Notice that for most existing graph classes, the best distance labelling constructions existing use at some point a hub labeling scheme at least as a key building block. Our interest lies in hub labelings of sparse graphs, i.e., those with $|E(G)| = O(n)$, for which we show a lowerbound of $\frac{n}{2^{O(\sqrt{\log n})}}$ for the average size of the hubsets. Additionally, we show a hub-labeling construction for sparse graphs of average size $O(\frac{n}{RS(n)^{c}})$ for some $0 < c < 1$, where $RS(n)$ is the so-called Ruzsa-Szemer{\'e}di function, linked to structure of induced matchings in dense graphs. This implies that further improving the lower bound on hub labeling size to $\frac{n}{2^{(\log n)^{o(1)}}}$ would require a breakthrough in the study of lower bounds on $RS(n)$, which have resisted substantial improvement in the last 70 years. For general distance labeling of sparse graphs, we show a lowerbound of $\frac{1}{2^{O(\sqrt{\log n})}} SumIndex(n)$, where $SumIndex(n)$ is the communication complexity of the Sum-Index problem over $Z_n$. Our results suggest that the best achievable hub-label size and distance-label size in sparse graphs may be $\Theta(\frac{n}{2^{(\log n)^c}})$ for some $0<c < 1$

Guest editorial: Special issue on matching under preferences

No abstract available

Popular matchings in the marriage and roommates problems

Popular matchings have recently been a subject of study in the context of the so-called House Allocation Problem, where the objective is to match applicants to houses over which the applicants have preferences. A matching M is called popular if there is no other matching M′ with the property that more applicants prefer their allocation in M′ to their allocation in M. In this paper we study popular matchings in the context of the Roommates Problem, including its special (bipartite) case, the Marriage Problem. We investigate the relationship between popularity and stability, and describe efficient algorithms to test a matching for popularity in these settings. We also show that, when ties are permitted in the preferences, it is NP-hard to determine whether a popular matching exists in both the Roommates and Marriage cases

Stable marriage and roommates problems with restricted edges: complexity and approximability

In the Stable Marriage and Roommates problems, a set of agents is given, each of them having a strictly ordered preference list over some or all of the other agents. A matching is a set of disjoint pairs of mutually acceptable agents. If any two agents mutually prefer each other to their partner, then they block the matching, otherwise, the matching is said to be stable. We investigate the complexity of finding a solution satisfying additional constraints on restricted pairs of agents. Restricted pairs can be either forced or forbidden. A stable solution must contain all of the forced pairs, while it must contain none of the forbidden pairs. Dias et al. (2003) gave a polynomial-time algorithm to decide whether such a solution exists in the presence of restricted edges. If the answer is no, one might look for a solution close to optimal. Since optimality in this context means that the matching is stable and satisfies all constraints on restricted pairs, there are two ways of relaxing the constraints by permitting a solution to: (1) be blocked by as few as possible pairs, or (2) violate as few as possible constraints n restricted pairs. Our main theorems prove that for the (bipartite) Stable Marriage problem, case (1) leads to View the MathML source-hardness and inapproximability results, whilst case (2) can be solved in polynomial time. For non-bipartite Stable Roommates instances, case (2) yields an View the MathML source-hard but (under some cardinality assumptions) 2-approximable problem. In the case of View the MathML source-hard problems, we also discuss polynomially solvable special cases, arising from restrictions on the lengths of the preference lists, or upper bounds on the numbers of restricted pairs