Matchings with Group Fairness Constraints: Online and Offline Algorithms

We consider the problem of assigning items to platforms in the presence of group fairness constraints. In the input, each item belongs to certain categories, called classes in this paper. Each platform specifies the group fairness constraints through an upper bound on the number of items it can serve from each class. Additionally, each platform also has an upper bound on the total number of items it can serve. The goal is to assign items to platforms so as to maximize the number of items assigned while satisfying the upper bounds of each class. This problem models several important realworld problems like ad-auctions, scheduling, resource allocations, school choice etc. We show that if the classes are arbitrary, then the problem is NP-hard and has a strong inapproximability. We consider the problem in both online and offline settings under natural restrictions on the classes. Under these restrictions, the problem continues to remain NP-hard but admits approximation algorithms with small approximation factors. We also implement some of the algorithms. Our experiments show that the algorithms work well in practice both in terms of efficiency and the number of items that get assigned to some platform.

[1]  Aranyak Mehta,et al.  Online Stochastic Matching: Beating 1-1/e , 2009, 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[2]  Adam Tauman Kalai,et al.  Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddings , 2016, NIPS.

[3]  Aranyak Mehta,et al.  Online bipartite matching with unknown distributions , 2011, STOC '11.

[4]  Deeparnab Chakrabarty,et al.  Fair Algorithms for Clustering , 2019, NeurIPS.

[5]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Randomized Primal-Dual analysis of RANKING for Online BiPartite Matching , 2013, SODA.

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

[7]  Christopher Jung,et al.  Online Learning with an Unknown Fairness Metric , 2018, NeurIPS.

[8]  Kinjal Basu,et al.  A Framework for Fairness in Two-Sided Marketplaces , 2020, ArXiv.

[9]  Sean A. Munson,et al.  Unequal Representation and Gender Stereotypes in Image Search Results for Occupations , 2015, CHI.

[10]  Lidia Arroyo Prieto Acm , 2020, Encyclopedia of Cryptography and Security.

[11]  Francesco Bonchi,et al.  Fair-by-design matching , 2020, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery.

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

[13]  Khaled M. Elbassioni,et al.  Simultaneous matchings: Hardness and approximation , 2008, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[14]  Hendrik W. Lenstra,et al.  Integer Programming with a Fixed Number of Variables , 1983, Math. Oper. Res..

[15]  Subhash Khot,et al.  UG-hardness to NP-hardness by losing half , 2019, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[16]  Nikhil R. Devanur,et al.  Near optimal online algorithms and fast approximation algorithms for resource allocation problems , 2011, EC '11.

[17]  Ioannis Lambadaris,et al.  Optimal server assignment in multi-server parallel queueing systems with random connectivities and random service failures , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC).

[18]  B. M. Fulk MATH , 1992 .

[19]  Meghana Nasre,et al.  Classified Rank-Maximal Matchings and Popular Matchings - Algorithms and Hardness , 2019, WG.

[20]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Two-Sided Fairness for Repeated Matchings in Two-Sided Markets: A Case Study of a Ride-Hailing Platform , 2019, KDD.

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

[22]  F. Kojima,et al.  Stability and Strategy-Proofness for Matching with Constraints: A Problem in the Japanese Medical Match and Its Solution , 2012 .

[23]  Aranyak Mehta,et al.  Online budgeted matching in random input models with applications to Adwords , 2008, SODA '08.

[24]  Jean C. Walrand,et al.  Achieving 100% throughput in an input-queued switch , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM '96. Conference on Computer Communications.

[25]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness , 1978 .

[26]  David Zuckerman,et al.  Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, Report No. 100 (2005) Linear Degree Extractors and the Inapproximability of MAX CLIQUE and CHROMATIC NUMBER , 2005 .

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

[28]  Magnús M. Halldórsson,et al.  Independent sets in bounded-degree hypergraphs , 2009, Discret. Appl. Math..

[29]  Arindam Khan,et al.  Group Fairness for Knapsack Problems , 2021, AAMAS.

[30]  Will Ma,et al.  Group-level Fairness Maximization in Online Bipartite Matching , 2020, AAMAS.

[31]  Matthew Costello,et al.  Who views online extremism? Individual attributes leading to exposure , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

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

[33]  Magnús M. Halldórsson,et al.  SDP-Based Algorithms for Maximum Independent Set Problems on Hypergraphs , 2009, ICALP.

[34]  Yuhao Zhang,et al.  How to match when all vertices arrive online , 2018, STOC.

[35]  SaberiAmin,et al.  AdWords and generalized online matching , 2007 .

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