Strategyproof and fair matching mechanism for union of symmetric m-convex constraints
Nathanaël Barrot, Kentaro Yahiro, Makoto Yokoo, Yuzhe Zhang

TL;DR
This paper introduces a new matching mechanism called QRDA that is fair and strategyproof for complex constraints in two-sided matching scenarios.
Contribution
The novel Quota Reduction Deferred Acceptance (QRDA) mechanism handles a new class of distributional constraints.
Findings
QRDA is fair and strategyproof for a union of symmetric M-convex sets.
QRDA produces better matchings for students than the ACDA baseline mechanism.
QRDA outperforms ACDA in terms of nonwastefulness in experiments.
Abstract
We identify a new class of distributional constraints defined as a union of symmetric M-convex sets, which can represent a wide range of real-life constraints in two-sided matching settings. Since M-convexity is not closed under union, a union of symmetric M-convex sets does not belong to this well-behaved class of constraints. Consequently, devising a fair and strategyproof mechanism to handle this new class is challenging. We present a novel mechanism for it called Quota Reduction Deferred Acceptance (QRDA), which repeatedly applies the standard Deferred Acceptance mechanism by sequentially reducing artificially introduced maximum quotas. We show that QRDA is fair and strategyproof when handling a union of symmetric M-convex sets, which extends previous results obtained for a subclass of the union of symmetric M-convex sets: ratio constraints. QRDA always yields a weakly better…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20
Figure 21
Figure 22
Figure 23
Figure 24
Figure 25
Figure 26
Figure 27
Figure 28
Figure 29
Figure 30
Figure 31
Figure 32
Figure 33
Figure 34
Figure 35
Figure 36
Figure 37
Figure 38
Figure 39
Figure 40
Figure 41
Figure 42
Figure 43
Figure 44
Figure 45
Figure 46
Figure 47
Figure 48
Figure 49
Figure 50Peer 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 · Complexity and Algorithms in Graphs · Auction Theory and Applications
