Paper detail

One-sided version of Gale-Shapley proposal algorithm and its likely behavior under random preferences

For a two-sided ($n$ men/$n$ women) stable matching problem) Gale and Shapley studied a proposal algorithm (men propose/women select, or the other way around), that determines a matching, not blocked by any unmatched pair. Irving used this algorithm as a first phase of his algorithm for one-sided (stable roommates) matching problem with $n$ agents. We analyze a fully extended version of Irving's proposal algorithm that runs all the way until either each agent holds a proposal or an agent gets rejected by everybody on the agent's preference list. It is shown that the terminal, directed, partnerships form a stable permutation with matched pairs remaining matched in any other stable permutation. A likely behavior of the proposal algorithm is studied under assumption that all $n$ rankings are independently uniform. It is proved that with high probability (w.h.p.) every agent has a partner, and that both the number of agents in cycles of length $\ge 3$ and the total number of stable matchings are bounded in probability. W.h.p. the total number of proposals is asymptotic to $0.5 n^{3/2}$.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.