I. Ashlagi, M. Braverman, Yashodhan Kanoria, Peng Shi
{"title":"Communication Requirements and Informative Signaling in Matching Markets","authors":"I. Ashlagi, M. Braverman, Yashodhan Kanoria, Peng Shi","doi":"10.1145/3033274.3084093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We study how much communication is needed to find a stable matching in a two-sided matching market with private preferences. Segal (2007) and Gonczarowski et al.~(2015) showed that in the worst case, any protocol that computes a stable matching requires the communication cost per agent to scale linearly in the total number of agents. In real-world markets with many agents, this communication requirement is implausibly high. This casts doubts on whether stable matching can arise in large markets. We study markets with realistic structure on the preferences and information of agents, and show that in \"typical\" markets, a stable matching can be found with much less communication effort. In our model, the preferences of workers are unrestricted, and the preferences of firms follow an additively separable latent utility model. Our efficient communication protocol modifies workers-proposing DA, by having firms signal workers they especially like, while also broadcasting qualification requirements to discourage other workers who have no realistic chances from applying. In the special case of tiered random markets, the protocol can be modified to run in two-rounds and involve only private messages. Our protocols have good incentive properties and give insights on how to mediate large matching markets to reduce congestion.","PeriodicalId":287551,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3033274.3084093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13
Abstract
We study how much communication is needed to find a stable matching in a two-sided matching market with private preferences. Segal (2007) and Gonczarowski et al.~(2015) showed that in the worst case, any protocol that computes a stable matching requires the communication cost per agent to scale linearly in the total number of agents. In real-world markets with many agents, this communication requirement is implausibly high. This casts doubts on whether stable matching can arise in large markets. We study markets with realistic structure on the preferences and information of agents, and show that in "typical" markets, a stable matching can be found with much less communication effort. In our model, the preferences of workers are unrestricted, and the preferences of firms follow an additively separable latent utility model. Our efficient communication protocol modifies workers-proposing DA, by having firms signal workers they especially like, while also broadcasting qualification requirements to discourage other workers who have no realistic chances from applying. In the special case of tiered random markets, the protocol can be modified to run in two-rounds and involve only private messages. Our protocols have good incentive properties and give insights on how to mediate large matching markets to reduce congestion.
我们研究了在具有私人偏好的双边匹配市场中,需要多少沟通才能找到稳定的匹配。Segal(2007)和Gonczarowski et al.~(2015)表明,在最坏的情况下,任何计算稳定匹配的协议都要求每个代理的通信成本在代理总数中呈线性增长。在具有许多代理的现实市场中,这种通信需求高得令人难以置信。这让人怀疑在大型市场中能否出现稳定的匹配。我们研究了具有现实结构的市场,研究了代理人的偏好和信息,并表明在“典型”市场中,可以用更少的沟通努力找到稳定的匹配。在我们的模型中,工人的偏好是不受限制的,企业的偏好遵循一个可加性可分离的潜在效用模型。我们的高效通信协议修改了工人提议的DA,通过让公司向他们特别喜欢的工人发出信号,同时也广播资格要求,以阻止其他没有实际机会的工人申请。在分层随机市场的特殊情况下,该协议可以修改为两轮运行,并且只涉及私人消息。我们的协议具有良好的激励特性,并为如何调解大型匹配市场以减少拥塞提供了见解。