Paper detail

Random Almost-Popular Matchings

For a set $A$ of $n$ people and a set $B$ of $m$ items, with each person having a preference list that ranks all items from most wanted to least wanted, we consider the problem of matching every person with a unique item. A matching $M$ is called $ε$-popular if for any other matching $M'$, the number of people who prefer $M'$ to $M$ is at most $εn$ plus the number of those who prefer $M$ to $M'$. In 2006, Mahdian showed that when randomly generating people's preference lists, if $m/n > 1.42$, then a 0-popular matching exists with $1-o(1)$ probability; and if $m/n < 1.42$, then a 0-popular matching exists with $o(1)$ probability. The ratio 1.42 can be viewed as a transition point, at which the probability rises from asymptotically zero to asymptotically one, for the case $ε=0$. In this paper, we introduce an upper bound and a lower bound of the transition point in more general cases. In particular, we show that when randomly generating each person's preference list, if $α(1-e^{-1/α}) > 1-ε$, then an $ε$-popular matching exists with $1-o(1)$ probability (upper bound); and if $α(1-e^{-(1+e^{1/α})/α}) < 1-2ε$, then an $ε$-popular matching exists with $o(1)$ probability (lower bound).

preprint2016arXivOpen 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 map preview

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.