Random matching under priorities: stability and no envy concepts

  • Haris Aziz
  • Bettina KlausEmail author
Original Paper


We consider stability concepts for random matchings where agents have preferences over objects and objects have priorities for the agents. When matchings are deterministic, the standard stability concept also captures the fairness property of no (justified) envy. When matchings can be random, there are a number of natural stability and fairness concepts that coincide with stability and no envy whenever matchings are deterministic. We formalize known stability concepts for random matchings for a general setting that allows weak preferences and weak priorities, unacceptability, and an unequal number of agents and objects. We then present a clear taxonomy of the stability concepts and identify logical relations between them. Finally, we present a transformation from the most general setting to the most restricted setting, and show how almost all our stability concepts are preserved by that transformation.


Supplementary material


  1. Abdulkadiroğlu A (2013) School choice, chapter 5. In: Vulkan N, Roth AE, Neeman Z (eds) Handbook of market design. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 138–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abdulkadiroğlu A, Sönmez T (2003) School choice: a mechanism design approach. Am Econ Rev 93(3):729–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Afacan MO (2018) The object allocation problem with random priorities. Games Econ Behav 110:71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aharoni R, Fleiner T (2003) On a lemma of Scarf. J Combin Theory Ser B 87:72–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aziz H (2019) A probabilistic approach to voting, allocation, matching, and coalition formation. In: Laslier J-F, Moulin H, Sanver R, Zwicker WS (eds) The future of economic design. Springer, Berlin (forthcoming) Google Scholar
  6. Balinski M, Sönmez T (1999) A tale of two mechanisms: student placement. J Econ Theory 84(1):73–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Birkhoff G (1946) Three observations on linear algebra. Rev Univ Nac Tucumán Rev Ser A 5:147–151Google Scholar
  8. Biró P, Fleiner T (2016) Fractional solutions for capacitated NTU-games, with applications to stable matchings. Discrete Optim (Part A) 22:241–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blum Y, Roth AE, Rothblum UG (1997) Vacancy chains and equilibration in senior-level labor markets. J Econ Theory 76(2):362–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Doğan B, Yildiz K (2016) Efficiency and stability of probabilistic assignments in marriage problems. Games Econ Behav 95:47–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ehlers L, Halafir IE, Yenmez MB, Yildirim MA (2003) School choice with controlled constraints: hard bounds versus soft bounds. J Econ Theory 153:648–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gale D, Shapley LS (1962) College admissions and the stability of marriage. Am Math Mon 69:9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Horn RA (1986) Topics in matrix analysis. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Irving RW (1994) Stable marriage and indifference. Discrete Appl Math 48:261–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kamada Y, Kojima F (2017) Stability concepts in matching under distributional constraints. J Econ Theory 168:107–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kesten O, Ünver U (2015) A theory of school choice lotteries. Theor Econ 10:543–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kojima F, Manea M (2010) Incentives in the probabilistic serial mechanism. J Econ Theory 145(1):106–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Manjunath V (2013) Stability and the core of probabilistic marriage problems. Technical Report 1809941, SSRNGoogle Scholar
  19. Pathak PA (2011) The mechanism design approach to student assignment. Annu Rev Econ 3:513–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Roth AE (1986) On the allocation of residents to rural hospitals: a general property of two-sided matching markets. Econometrica 54(2):425–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Roth AE, Rothblum UG, Vande Vate JH (1993) Stable matchings, optimal assignments, and linear programming. Math Oper Res 18(4):803–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rothblum UG (1992) Characterization of stable matchings as extreme points of a polytope. Math Program 54(1–3):57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schlegel JC (2018) A note on ex-ante stable lotteries. Econ Lett 164:90–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Teo C-P, Sethuraman J (1998) The geometry of fractional stable matchings and its applications. Math Oper Res 23(4):874–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vande Vate JH (1989) Linear programming brings marital bliss. Oper Res Lett 8(3):147–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Von Neumann J (1953) A certain zero-sum two-person game equivalent to the optimal assignment problem. In: Kuhn H, Tucker A (eds) Contributions to the theory of games. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  27. Wu Q, Roth AE (2018) The lattice of envy-free matchings. Games Econ Behav 109(3):201–2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science and EngineeringUNSW Sydney and Data61, CSIROSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Business and Economics (HEC)University of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations