Advertisement

Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 615–640 | Cite as

Zero-intelligence agents looking for a job

  • André VeskiEmail author
  • Kaire Põder
Regular Article
  • 232 Downloads

Abstract

We study a simple agent-based model of a decentralized matching market game in which agents (workers or job seekers) make proposals to other agents (firms) in order to be matched to a position within the firm. The aggregate result of agents interactions can be summarised in the form of a Beveridge curve, which determines the relationship between unmatched agents, unemployed job seekers and vacancies in firms. We open the black box of matching technology, by modelling how agents behave (make proposals) according to their information perception. We observe more efficient results—in the form of a downward shift of the Beverage curve in the case of simple zero-intelligent agents. Our comparative statics indicate that market conditions, such as the heterogeneity of agents’ preferences, will also shift the Beveridge curve downwards. Moreover, market thickness affects movement along the Beverage curve. Movement right-down along the curve if there is an increasing number of agents compared to positions within firms. Furthermore, we show that frictions in re-matching, such as commitment to a match, could be another factor shifting the Beveridge curve toward the origin.

Keywords

Matching market Computational experiment Decentralised matching Job search Beveridge curve 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Péter Biró for helpful comments during the early stages of this work and also the participants of the Santa Fe Institute Complex Systems Summer School 2015 for fruitful discussions. We are also grateful of constructive feedback from two anonymous referees, based on which the paper was significantly improved.

References

  1. Abraham K, Katz LF (1986) Cyclical unemployment: sectoral shifts or aggregate disturbances? J Polit Econ 94(3):507–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ackermann H, Goldberg PW, Mirrokni VS, Röglin H, Vöcking B (2008) Uncoordinated two-sided matching markets. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Electronic commerce. ACM Press, New York, pp 256–263Google Scholar
  3. Ashlagi I, Kanoria Y, Leshno JD (2013a) Unbalanced random matching markets. In: Proceedings of the fourteenth ACM conference on Electronic commerce. ACM Press, New York, pp 27–28Google Scholar
  4. Ashlagi I, Kanoria Y, Leshno JD (2013b) Unbalanced random matching markets: the stark effect of competition. http://web.mit.edu/iashlagi/www/papers/UnbalancedMatchingAKL.pdf. Accessed 14 Sept 2016
  5. Biró P, Norman G (2012) Analysis of stochastic matching markets. Int J Game Theory 42(4):1021–1040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blanchard OJ, Diamond P, Hall RE, Yellen J (1989) The Beveridge curve. Brook Pap Econ Act 1(1989):1–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boudreau JW (2010) Stratification and growth in agent-based matching markets. J Econ Behav Organ 75(2):168–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boudreau JW, Knoblauch V (2010) Marriage matching and intercorrelation of preferences. J Public Econ Theory 12(3):587–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Caldarelli G, Capocci A (2001) Beauty and distance in the stable marriage problem. Phys A 300(1–2):325–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen SH, Tai CC (2010) The agent-based double auction markets: 15 years on. In: Takadama K, Cioffi-Revilla C, Deffuant G (eds) Simulating interacting agents and social phenomena, chap 9. Springer, Tokyo, pp 119–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cormen TH, Leiserson CE, Rivest RL, Stein C (2004) Introduction to algorithms, 2nd edn. MIT Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  12. Dawid H, Gemkow S, Harting P, Hoog SVD, Neugart M (2014) An agent-based nacroeconomic nodel for economic policy analysis: the Eurace@ unibi model. Working papers in economics and management 01-2014Google Scholar
  13. Deissenberg C, van der Hoog S, Dawid H (2008) EURACE: a massively parallel agent-based model of the European economy. Appl Math Comput 204(2):541–552Google Scholar
  14. Diamantoudi E, Miyagawa E, Xue L (2015) Decentralized matching: the role of commitment. Games Econ Behav 92:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Echenique F, Wilson AJ (2009) Clearinghouses for two-sided matching: an experimental study. Social science working paper 1315. California Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  16. Echenique F, Yariv L (2013) An experimental study of decentralized matching. http://people.hss.caltech.edu/%7Elyariv/papers/ExpDecentralizedMatching.pdf. Accessed 25 May 2016
  17. Eriksson K, Häggström O (2007) Instability of matchings in decentralized markets with various preference structures. Int J Game Theory 36(3–4):409–420Google Scholar
  18. Fagiolo G, Dosi G, Gabriele R (2004) Matching, bargaining, and wage setting in an evolutionary model of labor market and output dynamics. Adv Complex Syst 07(02):157–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Farmer JD, Patelli P, Zovko II (2005) The predictive power of zero intelligence in financial markets. Proc Natl Acad Sci 102(6):2254–2259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gabriele R (2002) Labor market dynamics and institutions: an evolutionary approach. LEM working paper series 2002/07Google Scholar
  21. Gale D, Shapley LS (1962) College admissions and the stability of marriage. Am Math Mon 69(1):9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gode DK, Sunder S (1993) Allocative efficiency of markets with zero-intelligence traders: market as a partial substitute for individual rationality. J Polit Econ 101(1):119–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Guerrero OA, Axtell RL (2011) Using agentization for rxploring firm and labor dynamics. In: Emergent results of artificial economics. Springer, Berlin, chap 12, pp 139–150Google Scholar
  24. Guerrero OA, Axtell RL (2013) Employment growth through labor flow networks. PLoS ONE 8(5):e60808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Haeringer G, Wooders M (2011) Decentralized job matching. Int J Game Theory 40(1):1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hagberg AA, Schult DA, Swart PJ (2008) Exploring network structure, dynamics, and function using networkX. In: Varoquaux G, Vaught T, Millman J (eds) Proceedings of the 7th python in science conference, Pasadena, pp 11–15Google Scholar
  27. Hoefer M, Wagner L (2012) Locally stable matching with general preferences. http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.1265. Accessed 22 Aug 2016
  28. Immorlica N, Mahdian M (2015) Incentives in large random two-sided markets. ACM Trans Econ Comput 3(3):1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Knuth DE (1976) Mariages stables. Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal, MontréalGoogle Scholar
  30. Knuth DE (1997a) Seminumerical algorithms, 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  31. Knuth DE (1997b) Stable marriage and its relation to other combinatorial problems. American Mathematical Society, ProvidenceGoogle Scholar
  32. Ladley D (2012) Zero intelligence in economics and finance. Knowl Eng Rev 27(02):273–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Laureti P, Zhang YC (2003) Matching games with partial information. Phys A 324(1–2):49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mortensen DT, Pissarides CA (1999) Job reallocation, employment fluctuations and unemployment. In: Taylor JB, Woodford M (eds) Handbook of macroeconomics, vol 1. North Holland, Amsterdam, chap 18, pp 1171–1228Google Scholar
  35. Neugart M (2004) Endogeneous matching functions: and agent-based computational approach. Adv Complex Syst 07(02):187–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Neugart M, Richiardi M (2012) Agent-based models of the labor market. Laboratorio Riccardo Revelli working paper no. 125Google Scholar
  37. Niederle M, Yariv L (2009) Decentralized matching with aligned preferences. NBER working paper series 14840Google Scholar
  38. Pais J (2008) Incentives in decentralized random matching markets. Games Econ Behav 64(2):632–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Petrongolo B, Pissarides CA (2001) Looking into the black box: a survey of the matching function. J Econ Lit 39(2):390–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Riccetti L, Russo A, Gallegati M (2015) An agent based decentralized matching macroeconomic model. J Econ Interact Coord 10(2):305–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Richiardi M (2004) A search model of unemployment and firm dynamics. Adv Complex Syst 07(02):203–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Richiardi M (2006) Toward a non-equilibrium unemployment theory. Comput Econ 27(1):135–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roth AE (2008) Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions. Int J Game Theory 36(3–4):537–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Roth AE, Peranson E (1999) The redesign of the matching market for American physicians: some engineering aspects of economic design. Am Econ Rev 89(4):748–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roth AE, Sotomayor MAO (1990) Two-sided matching: a study in game-theoretic modeling and analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Roth AE, Vate JHV (1990) Random paths to stability in two-sided matching. Econometrica 58(6):1475–1480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sahin A, Song J, Topa G, Violante GL (2014) Mismatch unemployment. Am Econ Rev 104(11):3529–3564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shimer R (2013) Job search, labour force participation, and wage rigidities. In: Acemoglu D, Arellano M, Dekel E (eds) Advances in economics and econometrics: theory and applications: tenth world congress, chap 5. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 197–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Silva ST, Valente JMS, Teixeira AAC (2012) An evolutionary model of industry dynamics and firms’ institutional behavior with job search, bargaining and matching. J Econ Interact Coord 7(1):23–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tassier T, Menczer F (2008) Social network structure, segregation, and equality in a labor market with referral hiring. J Econ Behav Organ 66(3–4):514–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Veracierto M (2011) Worker flows and matching efficiency. Econ Perspect 35(4):147–169Google Scholar
  52. Zhang YC (2001) Happier world with more information. Phys A 299(1–2):104–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhou B, He Z, Jiang LL, Wang NX, Wang BH (2014a) Bidirectional selection between two classes in complex social networks. Sci Rep 4:7577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhou B, Qin S, Han XP, He Z, Xie JR, Wang BH (2014b) A model of two-way selection system for human behavior. PLoS ONE 9(1):e81424CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tallinn University of TechnologyTallinnEstonia
  2. 2.Estonian Business SchoolTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations