Strategy-proof school choice mechanisms with minimum quotas and initial endowments

Abstract We consider a school choice program where minimum quotas are imposed for each school, i.e., a school must be assigned at least a certain number of students to operate. We require that the obtained matching must respect the initial endowments, i.e., each student must be assigned to a school that is at least as good as her initial endowment school. Although minimum quotas are relevant in school choice programs and strategy-proofness is important to many policymakers, few existing mechanisms simultaneously achieve both. One difficulty is that no strategy-proof mechanism exists that is both efficient and fair under the presence of minimum quotas. Furthermore, existing mechanisms require that all students consider all schools acceptable to obtain a feasible matching that respects minimum quotas. This assumption is unrealistic in a school choice program. We consider the environment where a student considers her initial endowment school acceptable and the initial endowments satisfy all the minimum quotas. We develop two strategy-proof mechanisms. One mechanism, which we call the Top Trading Cycles among Representatives with Supplementary Seats (TTCR-SS), is based on the Top Trading Cycles (TTC) mechanism and is significantly extended to handle the supplementary seats of schools while respecting minimum quotas. TTCR-SS is Pareto efficient. The other mechanism, which we call Priority List-based Deferred Acceptance with Minimum Quotas (PLDA-MQ), is based on the Deferred Acceptance (DA) mechanism. PLDA-MQ is fair, satisfies a concept called Priority List-based (PL-) stability, and obtains the student-optimal matching within all PL-stable matchings. Our simulation results show that our new mechanisms are significantly better than simple extensions of the existing mechanisms.

[1]  M. Pycia,et al.  Incentive Compatible Allocation and Exchange of Discrete Resources , 2015 .

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

[3]  T. Morrill An alternative characterization of top trading cycles , 2013 .

[4]  Flip Klijn,et al.  Constrained school choice , 2009, J. Econ. Theory.

[5]  Fuhito Kojima,et al.  School choice: Impossibilities for affirmative action , 2012, Games Econ. Behav..

[6]  Fahiem Bacchus,et al.  SAT Is an Effective and Complete Method for Solving Stable Matching Problems with Couples , 2015, IJCAI.

[7]  Sampath Kannan,et al.  Private Pareto Optimal Exchange , 2014, EC.

[8]  Alexander Westkamp An analysis of the German university admissions system , 2013 .

[9]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Strategyproof Matching with Minimum Quotas , 2016, TEAC.

[10]  Kazuo Murota,et al.  M-Convex Function on Generalized Polymatroid , 1999, Math. Oper. Res..

[11]  F. Kojima,et al.  Efficient Matching under Distributional Constraints: Theory and Applications , 2015 .

[12]  Sebastian Braun,et al.  Implementing Quotas in University Admissions: An Experimental Analysis , 2011, Games Econ. Behav..

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

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

[15]  Yusuke Narita Match or Mismatch: Learning and Inertia in School Choice , 2016 .

[16]  L. Shapley,et al.  College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage , 1962 .

[17]  Tamás Fleiner,et al.  A Fixed-Point Approach to Stable Matchings and Some Applications , 2003, Math. Oper. Res..

[18]  Onur Kesten,et al.  On two competing mechanisms for priority-based allocation problems , 2006, J. Econ. Theory.

[19]  David A. Freedman,et al.  Machiavelli and the Gale-Shapley Algorithm , 1981 .

[20]  Jinpeng Ma Strategy-proofness and the strict core in a market with indivisibilities , 1994 .

[21]  A. Roth Incentive compatibility in a market with indivisible goods , 1982 .

[22]  Chien-Chung Huang,et al.  Classified stable matching , 2009, SODA '10.

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

[24]  David Manlove,et al.  The College Admissions problem with lower and common quotas , 2010, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[25]  L. Shapley,et al.  On cores and indivisibility , 1974 .

[26]  Muhammed A. Yıldırım,et al.  School Choice with Controlled Choice Constraints: Hard Bounds Versus Soft Bounds , 2012 .

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

[28]  Muhammed A. Yıldırım,et al.  Effective affirmative action in school choice: Effective affirmative action in school choice , 2013 .

[29]  Haris Aziz,et al.  Housing Markets with Indifferences: A Tale of Two Mechanisms , 2012, AAAI.

[30]  Kate Larson,et al.  Matching with Dynamic Ordinal Preferences , 2015, AAAI.

[31]  Jay Sethuraman,et al.  House allocation with indifferences: a generalization and a unified view , 2013, EC '13.

[32]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Designing matching mechanisms under constraints: An approach from discrete convex analysis , 2018, J. Econ. Theory.

[33]  M. B. Yenmez,et al.  Integrating Schools for Centralized Admissions , 2014 .

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

[35]  Tamás Fleiner,et al.  A Matroid Approach to Stable Matchings with Lower Quotas , 2012, Math. Oper. Res..

[36]  David Manlove,et al.  Size Versus Truthfulness in the House Allocation Problem , 2014, Algorithmica.

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

[38]  Isa Emin Hafalir,et al.  Effective affirmative action in school choice , 2011 .

[39]  Makoto Yokoo,et al.  Pareto Efficient Strategy-proof School Choice Mechanism with Minimum Quotas and Initial Endowments , 2016, AAMAS.

[40]  Andrew Postlewaite,et al.  Weak Versus Strong Domination in a Market with Indivisible Goods , 1977 .

[41]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  Matching with Contracts , 2005 .

[42]  Fahiem Bacchus,et al.  Strategy-Proofness in the Stable Matching Problem with Couples , 2016, AAMAS.

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

[44]  Thayer Morrill,et al.  Making just school assignments , 2015, Games Econ. Behav..