License: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license (CC BY 3.0)
When quoting this document, please refer to the following
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2019.4
URN: urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-109489
Go to the corresponding LIPIcs Volume Portal

Kavitha, Telikepalli

Popular Matchings: Good, Bad, and Mixed (Invited Talk)

LIPIcs-MFCS-2019-4.pdf (0.2 MB)


We consider the landscape of popular matchings in a bipartite graph G where every vertex has strict preferences over its neighbors. This is a very well-studied model in two-sided matching markets. A matching M is popular if it does not lose a head-to-head election against any matching, where each vertex casts a vote for the matching where it gets a better assignment. Roughly speaking, a popular matching is one such that there is no matching where more vertices are happier. The notion of popularity is more relaxed than stability: a classical notion studied for the last several decades. Popular matchings always exist in G since stable matchings always exist in a bipartite graph and every stable matching is popular.
Algorithmically speaking, the landscape of popular matching seems to have only a few bright spots. Every stable matching is a min-size popular matching and there are also simple linear time algorithms for computing a max-size popular matching and for the popular edge problem. All these algorithms reduce the popular matching problem to an appropriate question in stable matchings and solve the corresponding stable matching problem.
We now know NP-hardness results for many popular matching problems. These include the min-cost/max-weight popular matching problem and the problem of deciding if G admits a popular matching that is neither a min-size nor a max-size popular matching. For non-bipartite graphs, it is NP-hard to even decide if a popular matching exists or not.
A mixed matching is a probability distribution or a lottery over matchings. A popular mixed matching is one that never loses a head-to-head election against any mixed matching. As an allocation mechanism, a popular mixed matching has several nice properties. Moreover, finding a max-weight or min-cost popular mixed matching in G is easy (by solving a linear program). Interestingly, there is always an optimal popular mixed matching Pi with a simple structure: Pi = {(M_0,1/2),(M_1,1/2)} where M_0 and M_1 are matchings in G. Popular mixed matchings always exist in non-bipartite graphs as well and can be computed in polynomial time.

BibTeX - Entry

  author =	{Telikepalli Kavitha},
  title =	{{Popular Matchings: Good, Bad, and Mixed (Invited Talk)}},
  booktitle =	{44th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2019)},
  pages =	{4:1--4:1},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-117-7},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2019},
  volume =	{138},
  editor =	{Peter Rossmanith and Pinar Heggernes and Joost-Pieter Katoen},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-109489},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2019.4},
  annote =	{Keywords: Matchings under preferences, Algorithms, NP-Hardness}

Keywords: Matchings under preferences, Algorithms, NP-Hardness
Collection: 44th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2019)
Issue Date: 2019
Date of publication: 20.08.2019

DROPS-Home | Fulltext Search | Imprint | Privacy Published by LZI