Paper detail

Robust Stable Matchings: Dealing with Changes in Preferences

We study stable matchings that are robust to preference changes in the two-sided stable matching setting of Gale and Shapley [GS62]. Given two instances $A$ and $B$ on the same set of agents, a matching is said to be robust if it is stable under both instances. This notion captures desirable robustness properties in matching markets where preferences may evolve, be misreported, or be subject to uncertainty. While the classical theory of stable matchings reveals rich lattice, algorithmic, and polyhedral structure for a single instance, it is unclear which of these properties persist when stability is required across multiple instances. Our work initiates a systematic study of the structural and computational behavior of robust stable matchings under increasingly general models of preference changes. We analyze robustness under a hierarchy of perturbation models: 1. a single upward shift in one agent's preference list, 2. an arbitrary permutation change by a single agent, and 3. arbitrary preference changes by multiple agents on both sides. For each regime, we characterize when: 1. the set of robust stable matchings forms a sublattice, 2. the lattice of robust stable matchings admits a succinct Birkhoff partial order enabling efficient enumeration, 3. worker-optimal and firm-optimal robust stable matchings can be computed efficiently, and 4. the robust stable matching polytope is integral (by studying its LP formulation). We provide explicit counterexamples demonstrating where these structural and geometric properties break down, and complement these results with XP-time algorithms running in $O(n^k)$ time, parameterized by $k$, the number of agents whose preferences change. Our results precisely delineate the boundary between tractable and intractable cases for robust stable matchings.

preprint2026arXivOpen 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.