On two competing mechanisms for priority-based allocation problems.

We consider the priority-based allocation problem: there is a set of indivisible objects with multiple supplies (e.g., schools with seats) and a set of agents (e.g., students) with priorities over objects (e.g., proximity of residence area). We study two well-known and competing mechanisms. The agen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Journal of Economic Theory Vol. 127; no. 1; pp. 155 - 172
Autor principal: Kesten, Onur
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Academic Press Inc. March 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=511276282&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 511276282
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00220531
        RTH
      jtl: Journal of Economic Theory
      issn: 00220531
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: March 2006
      vid: 127
      iid: 1
      pid: 735
      pub: Academic Press Inc.
    artinfo:
      ui:
        511276282
        10.1016/j.jet.2004.11.001
      ppf: 155
      ppct: 17
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: On two competing mechanisms for priority-based allocation problems.
      aug:
        au: Kesten, Onur
      su:
        Economics
        Indivisibles (Philosophy)
        Resource allocation -- Mathematical models
      sug:
        subj:
          Economics
          Indivisibles (Philosophy)
          Resource allocation -- Mathematical models
      keyword: Indivisible goods
      ab: We consider the priority-based allocation problem: there is a set of indivisible objects with multiple supplies (e.g., schools with seats) and a set of agents (e.g., students) with priorities over objects (e.g., proximity of residence area). We study two well-known and competing mechanisms. The agent-optimal stable mechanism (AOSM) allots objects via the deferred acceptance algorithm. The top trading cycles mechanism (TTCM) allots objects via Gale's top trading cycles algorithm. We show that the two mechanisms are equivalent, or TTCM is fair (i.e., respects agents' priorities), or resource monotonic, or population monotonic, if and only if the priority structure is acyclic. Furthermore, if AOSM fails to be efficient (consistent) for a problem, TTCM also fails to be fair (consistent) for it. However, the converse is not necessarily true. Copyright (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N