Longer Lists Yield Better Matchings
Yuri Faenza, Aapeli Vuorinen

TL;DR
This paper analyzes how the length of preference lists in a two-sided matching market affects outcomes, showing longer lists generally lead to better matches for both students and schools, especially when preferences are randomly sampled.
Contribution
It provides a theoretical analysis of the impact of truncated preference lists on matching quality in the Serial Dictatorship mechanism with random preferences.
Findings
Longer preference lists improve match quality for students and schools.
Students prefer markets with longer lists when they prioritize being matched.
Schools always prefer longer preference lists in the model.
Abstract
Many centralized mechanisms for two-sided matching markets that enjoy strong theoretical properties assume that the planner solicits full information on the preferences of each participating agent. In particular, they expect that participants compile and communicate their complete preference lists over agents from the other side of the market. However, real-world markets are often very large and agents cannot always be expected to even produce a ranking of all options on the other side. It is therefore important to understand the impact of incomplete or truncated lists on the quality of the resultant matching. In this paper, we focus on the Serial Dictatorship mechanism in a model where each agent of the proposing side (students) has a random preference list of length , sampled independently and uniformly at random from schools, each of which has one seat. Our main result shows…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGame Theory and Voting Systems · Auction Theory and Applications · Game Theory and Applications
