A Unified Approach to Online Matching with Conflict-Aware Constraints

Online bipartite matching and allocation models are widely used to analyze and design markets such as Internet advertising, online labor, and crowdsourcing. Traditionally, vertices on one side of the market are fixed and known a priori, while vertices on the other side arrive online and are matched by a central agent to the offline side. The issue of possible conflicts among offline agents emerges in various real scenarios when we need to match each online agent with a set of offline agents.For example, in event-based social networks (e.g., Meetup), offline events conflict for some users since they will be unable to attend mutually-distant events at proximate times; in advertising markets, two competing firms may prefer not to be shown to one user simultaneously; and in online recommendation systems (e.g., Amazon Books), books of the same type “conflict” with each other in some sense due to the diversity requirement for each online buyer.The conflict nature inherent among certain offline agents raises significant challenges in both modeling and online algorithm design. In this paper, we propose a unifying model, generalizing the conflict models proposed in (She et al., TKDE 2016) and (Chen et al., TKDE 16). Our model can capture not only a broad class of conflict constraints on the offline side (which is even allowed to be sensitive to each online agent), but also allows a general arrival pattern for the online side (which is allowed to change over the online phase). We propose an efficient linear programming (LP) based online algorithm and prove theoretically that it has nearly-optimal online performance. Additionally, we propose two LP-based heuristics and test them against two natural baselines on both real and synthetic datasets. Our LP-based heuristics experimentally dominate the baseline algorithms, aligning with our theoretical predictions and supporting our unified approach.

[1]  Richard M. Karp,et al.  An optimal algorithm for on-line bipartite matching , 1990, STOC '90.

[2]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Budgeted Online Assignment in Crowdsourcing Markets: Theory and Practice , 2017, AAMAS.

[3]  Debmalya Panigrahi,et al.  Online Budgeted Allocation with General Budgets , 2016, EC.

[4]  Aranyak Mehta,et al.  Online Matching and Ad Allocation , 2013, Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci..

[5]  David Simchi-Levi,et al.  Assortment Planning for Recommendations at Checkout under Inventory Constraints , 2016 .

[6]  Chien-Ju Ho,et al.  Online Task Assignment in Crowdsourcing Markets , 2012, AAAI.

[7]  Aniket Kittur,et al.  Instrumenting the crowd: using implicit behavioral measures to predict task performance , 2011, UIST.

[8]  Lei Chen,et al.  Conflict-Aware Event-Participant Arrangement and Its Variant for Online Setting , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[9]  Yajun Wang,et al.  Matroid Online Bipartite Matching and Vertex Cover , 2016, EC.

[10]  Yuanyuan Tian,et al.  Event-based social networks: linking the online and offline social worlds , 2012, KDD.

[11]  Yasushi Kawase,et al.  Approximately Stable Matchings with Budget Constraints , 2017, AAAI.

[12]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Strategyproof matching with regional minimum and maximum quotas , 2016, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Lei Chen,et al.  Online Minimum Matching in Real-Time Spatial Data: Experiments and Analysis , 2016, Proc. VLDB Endow..

[14]  Zheng Wang,et al.  Multi-task Representation Learning for Travel Time Estimation , 2018, KDD.

[15]  Mark Fuge,et al.  Diverse Weighted Bipartite b-Matching , 2017, IJCAI.

[16]  Xiaoyan Zhu,et al.  Promoting Diversity in Recommendation by Entropy Regularizer , 2013, IJCAI.

[17]  Jiayin Chen,et al.  Stability and Pareto Optimality in Refugee Allocation Matchings , 2018, AAMAS.

[18]  Yaron Singer,et al.  Pricing mechanisms for crowdsourcing markets , 2013, WWW.

[19]  Laks V. S. Lakshmanan,et al.  On social event organization , 2014, KDD.

[20]  Jieping Ye,et al.  Deep Multi-View Spatial-Temporal Network for Taxi Demand Prediction , 2018, AAAI.

[21]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Controlled School Choice with Soft Bounds and Overlapping Types , 2015, AAAI.

[22]  Zheng Wang,et al.  Learning to Estimate the Travel Time , 2018, KDD.

[23]  Mohammad Taghi Hajiaghayi,et al.  The Online Stochastic Generalized Assignment Problem , 2013, APPROX-RANDOM.

[24]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Assigning Tasks to Workers based on Historical Data: Online Task Assignment with Two-sided Arrivals , 2018, AAMAS.

[25]  Mohammad Taghi Hajiaghayi,et al.  Online prophet-inequality matching with applications to ad allocation , 2012, EC '12.

[26]  Andreas Krause,et al.  Truthful incentives in crowdsourcing tasks using regret minimization mechanisms , 2013, WWW.

[27]  Junyu Niu,et al.  A Framework for Recommending Relevant and Diverse Items , 2016, IJCAI.

[28]  Alex Thomo,et al.  Conflict-Aware Weighted Bipartite B-Matching and Its Application to E-Commerce , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[29]  Sepehr Assadi,et al.  Online Assignment of Heterogeneous Tasks in Crowdsourcing Markets , 2015, HCOMP.

[30]  Jieping Ye,et al.  Flexible Online Task Assignment in Real-Time Spatial Data , 2017, Proc. VLDB Endow..

[31]  Alex Thomo,et al.  Conflict-Aware Weighted Bipartite B-Matching and Its Application to E-Commerce , 2016, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[32]  Lei Chen,et al.  Online mobile Micro-Task Allocation in spatial crowdsourcing , 2016, 2016 IEEE 32nd International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE).

[33]  Zoltán Füredi,et al.  On the fractional matching polytope of a hypergraph , 1993, Comb..

[34]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Allocation Problems in Ride-sharing Platforms , 2017, AAAI.