Ordinal Efficiency, Fairness, and Incentives in Large Markets

Efficiency and symmetric treatment of agents are the primary goals of resource allocation in environments without transfers. Focusing on ordinal mecha- nisms in which no small group of agents can substantially change the allocations of others, we show that all asymptotically efficient, symmetric, and asymptotically strategy-proof mechanisms lead to the same allocations in large markets. In particular, many mechanisms — both well-known and newly developed — are allocationally equivalent. This equivalence is consistent with prior empirical findings that different mechanisms lead to similar allocations in school choice. We also show that uniform randomizations over deterministic efficient mechanisms are asymptotically efficient.

[1]  SangMok Lee,et al.  Incentive Compatibility of Large Centralized Matching Markets , 2017 .

[2]  Eduardo M. Azevedo,et al.  A Supply and Demand Framework for Two-Sided Matching Markets , 2014, Journal of Political Economy.

[3]  M. Utku Ünver,et al.  Incentive Compatible Allocation and Exchange of Discrete Resources , 2015 .

[4]  Aytek Erdil,et al.  Strategy-proof stochastic assignment , 2014, J. Econ. Theory.

[5]  Gabriel D. Carroll A general equivalence theorem for allocation of indivisible objects , 2014 .

[6]  Clayton R. Featherstone Rank Eciency: Investigating a Widespread Ordinal Welfare Criterion , 2013 .

[7]  M. Pycia Assignment with Multiple-Unit Demands and Responsive Preferences , 2013 .

[8]  Eun Jeong Heo,et al.  Probabilistic Assignment of Objects: Characterizing the Serial Rule , 2011, J. Econ. Theory.

[9]  Eric Budish,et al.  Strategyproofness for "Price Takers" as a Desideratum for Market Design , 2011, AMMA.

[10]  Marek Pycia,et al.  Trading Cycles for School Choice , 2011 .

[11]  Daisuke Hirata,et al.  Characterizations of the Probabilistic Serial Mechanism , 2011 .

[12]  SangMok Lee,et al.  The Revealed Preference Theory of Stable and Extremal Stable Matchings , 2010 .

[13]  Özgür Yilmaz,et al.  The probabilistic serial mechanism with private endowments , 2010, Games Econ. Behav..

[14]  Jay Sethuraman,et al.  Lotteries in Student Assignment: An Equivalence Result , 2010 .

[15]  Eric Budish,et al.  The Multi-Unit Assignment Problem: Theory and Evidence from Course Allocation at Harvard , 2010 .

[16]  Fuhito Kojima,et al.  Incentives in the probabilistic serial mechanism , 2010, J. Econ. Theory.

[17]  Yeon-Koo Che,et al.  Resolving Conflicting Preferences in School Choice: The 'Boston' Mechanism Reconsidered , 2009 .

[18]  M. Manea,et al.  Asymptotic ordinal inefficiency of random serial dictatorship , 2009 .

[19]  Antonio Miralles,et al.  School Choice: The Case for the Boston Mechanism , 2009, AMMA.

[20]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  Strategy-Proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the NYC High School Match , 2009 .

[21]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  IMPLEMENTING RANDOM ASSIGNMENTS, PART I: A GENERALIZATION OF THE BIRKHOFF-VON NEUMANN THEOREM , 2009 .

[22]  Fuhito Kojima,et al.  Random assignment of multiple indivisible objects , 2009, Math. Soc. Sci..

[23]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  IMPLEMENTING RANDOM ASSIGNMENTS : A GENERALIZATION OF THE BIRKHOFF-VON NEUMANN THEOREM , 2009 .

[24]  Yeon-Koo Che,et al.  Asymptotic Equivalence of Probabilistic Serial and Random Priority Mechanisms , 2008 .

[25]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  Leveling the Playing Field: Sincere and Sophisticated Players in the Boston Mechanism , 2008 .

[26]  Jay Sethuraman,et al.  A solution to the random assignment problem on the full preference domain , 2006, J. Econ. Theory.

[27]  Tayfun Sönmez,et al.  Games of school choice under the Boston mechanism , 2006 .

[28]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  The Boston Public School Match , 2005 .

[29]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  The New York City High School Match , 2005 .

[30]  Nicole Immorlica,et al.  Marriage, honesty, and stability , 2005, SODA '05.

[31]  E. Kalai Large Robust Games , 2004 .

[32]  M. Jackson,et al.  Envy-freeness and implementation in large economies , 2007 .

[33]  Tayfun Sönmez,et al.  Ordinal efficiency and dominated sets of assignments , 2003, J. Econ. Theory.

[34]  Atila Abdulkadiroglu,et al.  School Choice: A Mechanism Design Approach , 2003 .

[35]  Yan Chen,et al.  Improving Efficiency of On-Campus Housing: An Experimental Study , 2002 .

[36]  Andrew McLennan,et al.  Ordinal Efficiency and the Polyhedral Separating Hyperplane Theorem , 2002, J. Econ. Theory.

[37]  H. Moulin,et al.  A simple random assignment problem with a unique solution , 2002 .

[38]  Hervé Moulin,et al.  A New Solution to the Random Assignment Problem , 2001, J. Econ. Theory.

[39]  Hervé Moulin,et al.  Scheduling with Opting Out: Improving upon Random Priority , 2001, Oper. Res..

[40]  S. Pápai,et al.  Strategyproof Assignment by Hierarchical Exchange , 2000 .

[41]  Atila Abdulkadiroglu,et al.  HOUSE ALLOCATION WITH EXISTING TENANTS , 1999 .

[42]  Joseph M. Ostroy,et al.  Perfect Competition in the Continuous Assignment Model , 1999 .

[43]  Joseph M. Ostroy,et al.  Efficient Incentive Compatible Economies Are Perfectly Competitive , 1999 .

[44]  A. Roth,et al.  The Redesign of the Matching Market for American Physicians: Some Engineering Aspects of Economic Design , 1999, The American economic review.

[45]  M. Balinski,et al.  A Tale of Two Mechanisms: Student Placement , 1999 .

[46]  U. Rothblum,et al.  Truncation Strategies in Matching Markets-in Search of Advice for Participants , 1999 .

[47]  Atila Abdulkadiroglu,et al.  RANDOM SERIAL DICTATORSHIP AND THE CORE FROM RANDOM ENDOWMENTS IN HOUSE ALLOCATION PROBLEMS , 1998 .

[48]  D. Gale,et al.  Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Criteria of Justice , 1991 .

[49]  David Schmeidler,et al.  Strategic behaviour and a notion of ex ante efficiency in a voting model , 1986 .

[50]  A. Roth The college admissions problem is not equivalent to the marriage problem , 1985 .

[51]  P. Champsaur,et al.  A Note on Incentives in Large Economies , 1982 .

[52]  M. Shubik,et al.  Efficiency properties of strategies market games: An axiomatic approach , 1980 .

[53]  Bezalel Peleg A note on manipulability of large voting schemes , 1979 .

[54]  Leonid Hurwicz,et al.  On allocations attainable through Nash equilibria , 1979 .

[55]  P. Hammond Straightforward Individual Incentive Compatibility in Large Economies , 1979 .

[56]  E. Maskin,et al.  The Implementation of Social Choice Rules: Some General Results on Incentive Compatibility , 1979 .

[57]  R. Zeckhauser,et al.  The Efficient Allocation of Individuals to Positions , 1979, Journal of Political Economy.

[58]  Allan Gibbard,et al.  Straightforwardness of Game Forms with Lotteries as Outcomes , 1978 .

[59]  A. Gibbard Manipulation of Schemes That Mix Voting with Chance , 1977 .

[60]  D. J. Roberts,et al.  THE INCENTIVES FOR PRICE-TAKING BEHAVIOR IN LARGE EXCHANGE ECONOMIES , 1976 .

[61]  H. Varian Equity, Envy and Efficiency , 1974 .

[62]  David Schmeidler,et al.  Fair Net Trades , 1972 .

[63]  L. Shapley,et al.  The assignment game I: The core , 1971 .

[64]  D. Foley Resource allocation and the public sector , 1967 .

[65]  R. Aumann Markets with a continuum of traders , 1964 .

[66]  William Vickrey,et al.  Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders , 1961 .