BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Assaf Romm

Assaf Romm contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Science and Game Theoryecon.TH

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

The Large Core of College Admission Markets: Theory and Evidence

We study stable allocations in college admissions markets where students can attend the same college under different financial terms. The deferred acceptance algorithm identifies a stable allocation where funding is allocated based on merit. While merit-based stable allocations assign the same students to college, non-merit-based stable allocations may differ in the number of students assigned to college. In large markets, this possibility requires heterogeneity in applicants' sensitivity to financial terms. In Hungary, where such heterogeneity is present, a non-merit-based stable allocation would increase the number of assigned applicants by 1.9%, and affect 8.3% of the applicants relative to any merit-based stable allocation. These findings contrast sharply with findings from the matching (without contracts) literature.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Matching for the Israeli "Mechinot" Gap-Year Programs: Handling Rich Diversity Requirements

We describe our experience with designing and running a matching market for the Israeli "Mechinot" gap-year programs. The main conceptual challenge in the design of this market was the rich set of diversity considerations, which necessitated the development of an appropriate preference-specification language along with corresponding choice-function semantics, which we also theoretically analyze. Our contribution extends the existing toolbox for two-sided matching with soft constraints. This market was run for the first time in January 2018 and matched 1,607 candidates (out of a total of 3,120 candidates) to 35 different programs, has been run twice more since, and has been adopted by the Joint Council of the "Mechinot" gap-year programs for the foreseeable future.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Playing on a Level Field: Sincere and Sophisticated Players in the Boston Mechanism with a Coarse Priority Structure

Who gains and who loses from a manipulable school-choice mechanism? Studying the outcomes of sincere and sophisticated students under the manipulable Boston Mechanism as compared with the strategy-proof Deferred Acceptance, we provide robust "anything-goes" theorems for large random markets with coarse priority structures. I.e., there are many sincere and sophisticated students who prefer the Boston Mechanism to Deferred Acceptance, and vice versa. Some populations may even benefit from being sincere (if also perceived as such). Our findings reconcile qualitative differences between previous theory and known empirical results. We conclude by studying market forces that can influence the choice between these mechanisms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access