Online Matching with Stochastic Rewards: Optimal Competitive Ratio via Path Based Formulation

The problem of online matching with stochastic rewards is a generalization of the online bipartite matching problem where each edge has a probability of success. When a match is made it succeeds with the probability of the corresponding edge. Introducing this model, Mehta and Panigrahi (FOCS 2012) focused on the special case of identical edge probabilities. Comparing against a deterministic offline LP, they showed that the Ranking algorithm of Karp et al. (STOC 1990) is 0.534 competitive and proposed a new online algorithm with an improved guarantee of 0.567 for vanishingly small probabilities. For the case of vanishingly small but heterogeneous probabilities Mehta et al. (SODA 2015), gave a 0.534 competitive algorithm against the same LP benchmark. For the more general vertex-weighted version of the problem, to the best of our knowledge, no results being 1/2 were previously known even for identical probabilities. We focus on the vertex-weighted version and give two improvements. First, we show that a natural generalization of the Perturbed-Greedy algorithm of Aggarwal et al. (SODA 2011), is (1-1/e) competitive when probabilities decompose as a product of two factors, one corresponding to each vertex of the edge. This is the best achievable guarantee as it includes the case of identical probabilities and in particular, the classical online bipartite matching problem. Second, we give a deterministic 0.596 competitive algorithm for the previously well studied case of case of fully heterogeneous but vanishingly small edge probabilities. A key contribution of our approach is the use of novel path-based formulations and a generalization of the primal-dual scheme of Devanur et al. (SODA 2013). These allow us to compare against the natural benchmark of clairvoyant (offline) algorithms that know the sequence of arrivals and the edge probabilities in advance, but not the outcomes of potential matches. These ideas may be of independent interest in other online settings with post-allocation stochasticity.

[1]  Mikhail Kapralov,et al.  Improved Bounds for Online Stochastic Matching , 2010, ESA.

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

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

[4]  Gagan Goel,et al.  Online Vertex-Weighted Bipartite Matching and Single-bid Budgeted Allocations , 2010, SODA.

[5]  Monika Henzinger,et al.  Online Bipartite Matching with Decomposable Weights , 2014, ESA.

[6]  David Simchi-Levi,et al.  Online Assortment Optimization with Reusable Resources , 2019, Manag. Sci..

[7]  Garud Iyengar,et al.  Online Allocation of Reusable Resources: Achieving Optimal Competitive Ratio , 2020, ArXiv.

[8]  Martin Pál,et al.  Algorithms for Secretary Problems on Graphs and Hypergraphs , 2008, ICALP.

[9]  Morteza Zadimoghaddam,et al.  Simultaneous approximations for adversarial and stochastic online budgeted allocation , 2012, SODA.

[10]  Claire Mathieu,et al.  On-line bipartite matching made simple , 2008, SIGA.

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

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

[13]  Bala Kalyanasundaram,et al.  An optimal deterministic algorithm for online b-matching , 1996, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[14]  Hamid Nazerzadeh,et al.  Real-time optimization of personalized assortments , 2013, EC.

[15]  Devavrat Shah,et al.  Budget-Optimal Task Allocation for Reliable Crowdsourcing Systems , 2011, Oper. Res..

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

[17]  Patrick Jaillet,et al.  Online Stochastic Matching: New Algorithms with Better Bounds , 2014, Math. Oper. Res..

[18]  Aranyak Mehta,et al.  AdWords and generalized on-line matching , 2005, 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'05).

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

[20]  Vivek F. Farias,et al.  The Fulfillment-Optimization Problem , 2019 .

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

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

[23]  Thomas P. Hayes,et al.  The adwords problem: online keyword matching with budgeted bidders under random permutations , 2009, EC '09.

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

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

[26]  Aravind Srinivasan,et al.  New Algorithms, Better Bounds, and a Novel Model for Online Stochastic Matching , 2016, ESA.

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

[28]  Joseph Naor,et al.  Online Primal-Dual Algorithms for Maximizing Ad-Auctions Revenue , 2007, ESA.

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

[30]  Carri W. Chan,et al.  Stochastic Depletion Problems: Effective Myopic Policies for a Class of Dynamic Optimization Problems , 2008, Math. Oper. Res..

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

[32]  Rad Niazadeh,et al.  Linear Programming Based Online Policies for Real-Time Assortment of Reusable Resources , 2019, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[33]  Atri Rudra,et al.  When LP Is the Cure for Your Matching Woes: Improved Bounds for Stochastic Matchings , 2010, Algorithmica.