Abstract
We study situations of allocating positions to students based on priorities. An example is the assignment of medical students to hospital residencies on the basis of entrance exams. For markets without couples, e.g., for undergraduate student placement, acyclicity is a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of a fair and efficient placement mechanism (Ergin in Econometrica 70:2489–2497, 2002). We show that in the presence of couples acyclicity is still necessary, but not sufficient. A second necessary condition is priority-togetherness of couples. A priority structure that satisfies both necessary conditions is called pt-acyclic.
For student placement problems where all quotas are equal to one we characterize pt-acyclicity and show that it is a sufficient condition for the existence of a fair and efficient placement mechanism. If in addition to pt-acyclicity we require reallocation- and vacancy-fairness for couples, the so-called dictator- bidictator placement mechanism is the unique fair and efficient placement mechanism.
Finally, for general student placement problems, we show that pt-acyclicity may not be sufficient for the existence of a fair and efficient placement mechanism. We identify a sufficient condition such that the so-called sequential placement mechanism produces a fair and efficient allocation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alkan A, Gale D (2003) Stable schedule matching under revealed preferences. J Econ Theory 112:289–306
Balinski M, Sönmez T (1999) A tale of two mechanisms: student placement. J Econ Theory 84:73–94
Ehlers L (2002) Coalitional strategy-proof house allocation. J Econ Theory 105:298–317
Ehlers L, Klaus B (2003) Resource-monotonic house allocation. Int J Game Theory 32:545–560
Ehlers L, Klaus B (2006a) Efficient priority rules. Games Econ Behav 55:372–384
Ehlers L, Klaus B (2006b) Consistent House Allocation. Econ Theory (in press). DOI 10.1007/s00199-005-0077-z
Ehlers L, Klaus B, Pápai S (2002) Strategy-proofness and population-monotonicity for house allocation problems. J Math Econ 83:329–339
Ergin HI (2002) Efficient resource allocation on the basis of priorities. Econometrica 70:2489–2497
Gale D, Shapley LS (1962) College admissions and the stability of marriage. Am Math Mon 69:9–15
Hatfield JW, Milgrom P (2005) Auctions, matching and the law of aggregate demand. Am Econ Rev 95:913–935
Kelso AS, Crawford VP (1982) Job matching, coalition formation, and gross substitutes. Econometrica 50:1483–1504
Kesten O (2006) On two competing mechanisms for priority-based allocation problems. J Econ Theory 127:155–171
Klaus B, Klijn F (2005) Stable matchings and preferences of couples. J Econ Theory 121:75–106
Klaus B, Klijn F (2007) Paths to Stability for Matching Markets with Couples. Games Econ Behav 58:154–171 (DOI 10.1016/j.geb.2006.03.002)
Klaus B, Klijn F, Massó J (2006) Some Things Couples always Wanted to Know about Stable~Matchings (but Were Afraid to Ask). Rev Econ Des (in press). DOI 10.1007/s10058-006-0017-9
Roth AE (1984) The evolution of the labor market for medical interns and residents: a case study in game theory. J Polit Econ 92:991–1016
Roth AE (1985) The college admissions problem is not equivalent to the marriage problem. J Econ Theory 36:277–288
Roth AE, Sotomayor MAO (1990) Two-sided matching: a study in game-theoretic modeling and analysis. Econometric Society Monograph Series. Cambridge University Press, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0 ), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
Klaus, B., Klijn, F. Fair and efficient student placement with couples. Int J Game Theory 36, 177–207 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00182-006-0059-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00182-006-0059-9