Secretary Matching Meets Probing with Commitment

We consider the online bipartite matching problem within the context of stochastic probing with commitment. This is the one-sided online bipartite matching problem where edges adjacent to an online node must be probed to determine if they exist based on edge probabilities that become known when an online vertex arrives. If a probed edge exists, it must be used in the matching. We consider the competitiveness of online algorithms in the adversarial order model (AOM) and the secretary/random order model (ROM). More specifically, we consider an unknown bipartite stochastic graph G = (U, V, E) where U is the known set of offline vertices, V is the set of online vertices, G has edge probabilities (pe)e∈E , and G has edge weights (we)e∈E or vertex weights (wu)u∈U . Additionally, G has a downward-closed set of probing constraints (Cv)v∈V , where Cv indicates which sequences of edges adjacent to an online vertex v can be probed. This model generalizes the various settings of the classical bipartite matching problem (i.e. with and without probing). Our contributions include the introduction and analysis of probing within the random order model, and our generalization of probing constraints which includes budget (i.e. knapsack) constraints. Our algorithms run in polynomial time assuming access to a membership oracle for each Cv. In the vertex weighted setting, for adversarial order arrivals, we generalize the known 2 competitive ratio to our setting of Cv constraints. For random order arrivals, we show that the same algorithm attains an asymptotic competitive ratio of 1 − 1/e, provided the edge probabilities vanish to 0 sufficiently fast. We also obtain a strict competitive ratio for non-vanishing edge probabilities when the probing constraints are sufficiently simple. For example, if each Cv corresponds to a patience constraint lv (i.e., lv is the maximum number of probes of edges adjacent to v), and any one of following three conditions is satisfied (each studied in previous papers), then there is a conceptually simple greedy algorithm whose competitive ratio is 1 − 1 e . When the offline vertices are unweighted. When the online vertex probabilities are “vertex uniform”; i.e., pu,v = pv for all (u, v) ∈ E. When the patience constraint lv satisfies lv ∈ {[1, |U |} for every online vertex; i.e., every online vertex either has unit or full patience. Finally, in the edge weighted case, we match the known optimal 1 e asymptotic competitive ratio for the classic (i.e. without probing) secretary matching problem. 2012 ACM Subject Classification Theory of computation → Design and analysis of algorithms

[1]  Berthold Vöcking,et al.  An Optimal Online Algorithm for Weighted Bipartite Matching and Extensions to Combinatorial Auctions , 2013, ESA.

[2]  Anupam Gupta,et al.  A Stochastic Probing Problem with Applications , 2013, IPCO.

[3]  Vineet Goyal,et al.  Online Matching with Stochastic Rewards: Optimal Competitive Ratio via Path Based Formulation , 2019, EC.

[4]  Sreenivas Gollapudi,et al.  Hiring Under Uncertainty , 2019, ICML.

[5]  Marek Adamczyk,et al.  Improved analysis of the greedy algorithm for stochastic matching , 2011, Inf. Process. Lett..

[6]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Improved Guarantees for Offline Stochastic Matching via new Ordered Contention Resolution Schemes , 2021, ArXiv.

[7]  Euiwoong Lee,et al.  Optimal Online Contention Resolution Schemes via Ex-Ante Prophet Inequalities , 2018, ESA.

[8]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Vertex-weighted Online Stochastic Matching with Patience Constraints , 2019, ArXiv.

[9]  Rebecca Reiffenhäuser,et al.  An Optimal Truthful Mechanism for the Online Weighted Bipartite Matching Problem , 2019, SODA.

[10]  David P. Williamson,et al.  The Design of Approximation Algorithms , 2011 .

[11]  Fabrizio Grandoni,et al.  When the Optimum is also Blind: a New Perspective on Universal Optimization , 2017, ICALP.

[12]  Yuhao Zhang,et al.  Online Vertex-Weighted Bipartite Matching: Beating 1-1/e with Random Arrivals , 2018, ICALP.

[13]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  Follow Your Star: New Frameworks for Online Stochastic Matching with Known and Unknown Patience , 2021, AISTATS.

[14]  Morteza Zadimoghaddam,et al.  Online Stochastic Matching with Unequal Probabilities , 2014, SODA.

[15]  Allan Borodin,et al.  Prophet Inequality Matching Meets Probing with Commitment , 2021, ArXiv.

[16]  Mohammad Mahdian,et al.  Online bipartite matching with random arrivals: an approach based on strongly factor-revealing LPs , 2011, STOC '11.

[17]  Amin Saberi,et al.  Online stochastic matching: online actions based on offline statistics , 2010, SODA '11.

[18]  Fabrizio Grandoni,et al.  Improved Approximation Algorithms for Stochastic Matching , 2015, ESA.

[19]  Aranyak Mehta,et al.  Online Matching with Stochastic Rewards , 2012, 2012 IEEE 53rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[20]  Bernd Gärtner,et al.  Understanding and using linear programming , 2007, Universitext.

[21]  Chandra Chekuri,et al.  Submodular function maximization via the multilinear relaxation and contention resolution schemes , 2011, STOC '11.

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

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

[24]  Atri Rudra,et al.  Approximating Matches Made in Heaven , 2009, ICALP.

[25]  Zhiyi Huang,et al.  Online primal dual meets online matching with stochastic rewards: configuration LP to the rescue , 2020, STOC.