House Markets with Matroid and Knapsack Constraints

Authors Piotr Krysta, Jinshan Zhang

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.52 MB
  • 14 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Piotr Krysta
Jinshan Zhang

Cite AsGet BibTex

Piotr Krysta and Jinshan Zhang. House Markets with Matroid and Knapsack Constraints. In 43rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2016). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 55, pp. 141:1-141:14, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2016)


Classical online bipartite matching problem and its generalizations are central algorithmic optimization problems. The second related line of research is in the area of algorithmic mechanism design, referring to the broad class of house allocation or assignment problems. We introduce a single framework that unifies and generalizes these two streams of models. Our generalizations allow for arbitrary matroid constraints or knapsack constraints at every object in the allocation problem. We design and analyze approximation algorithms and truthful mechanisms for this framework. Our algorithms have best possible approximation guarantees for most of the special instantiations of this framework, and are strong generalizations of the previous known results.
  • Algorithmic mechanism design; Approximation algorithms; Matching under preferences; Matroid and knapsack constraints


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. A. Abdulkadiroǧlu and T. Sönmez. Random serial dictatorship and the core from random endowments in house allocation problems. Econometrica, 66(3):689-701, 1998. Google Scholar
  2. D.J. Abraham, R.W. Irving, and D.F. Manlove. Two algorithms for the student-project allocation problem. Journal of Discrete Algorithms, 5(1):73-90, 2007. Google Scholar
  3. M. Adamczyk, P. Sankowski, and Q. Zhang. Efficiency of truthful and symmetric mechanisms in one-sided matching. In Proc. 7th International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT), pages 13-24. Springer, 2014. Google Scholar
  4. G. Aggarwal, G. Goel, C. Karande, and A. Mehta. Online vertex-weighted bipartite matching and single-bid budgeted allocations. In Proc. 22nd Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 1253-1264. ACM-SIAM, 2011. URL:
  5. M. Babaioff, N. Immorlica, and R. Kleinberg. Matroids, secretary problems, and online mechanisms. In Proc. 18th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 434-443. ACM-SIAM, 2007. Google Scholar
  6. A. Bhalgat, D. Chakrabarty, and S. Khanna. Social welfare in one-sided matching markets without money. In Proc. of Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques - 14th International Workshop, (APPROX), and 15th International Workshop, (RANDOM), pages 87-98, 2011. Google Scholar
  7. A. Bogomolnaia and H. Moulin. A new solution to the random assignment problem. Journal of Economic Theory, 100(2):295 - 328, 2001. Google Scholar
  8. A. Bogomolnaia and H. Moulin. Size versus fairness in the assignment problem. Games and Economic Behavior, 90:119-127, 2015. Google Scholar
  9. D. Chakrabarty and C. Swamy. Welfare maximization and truthfulness in mechanism design with ordinal preferences. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science, pages 105-120, 2014. Google Scholar
  10. H. T-H Chan, F. Chen, X. Wu, and Z. Zhao. Ranking on arbitrary graphs: Rematch via continuous LP with monotone and boundary condition constraints. In Proc. 25th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 1112-1122. ACM-SIAM, 2014. Google Scholar
  11. N. Chen, N. Gravin, and P. Lu. Truthful generalized assignments via stable matching. Mathematics of Operations Research, 39(3):722-736, 2014. Google Scholar
  12. Y. Chen and T. Sönmez. Improving efficiency of on-campus housing: An experimental study. American Economic Review, 92(5):1669-1686, 2002. Google Scholar
  13. W.H. Cunningham. Improved bounds for matroid partition and intersection algorithms. SIAM Journal on Computing, 15(4):948-957, 1986. Google Scholar
  14. N.R. Devanur, K. Jain, and R. Kleinberg. Randomized primal-dual analysis of RANKING for online bipartite matching. In Proc. 24th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 101-107. ACM-SIAM, 2013. Google Scholar
  15. S. Dughmi and A. Ghosh. Truthful assignment without money. In Proc. 11th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), pages 325-334. ACM, 2010. Google Scholar
  16. J. Edmonds. Submodular functions, matroids, and certain polyhedra. Combinatorial structures and their applications, pages 69-87, 1970. Google Scholar
  17. A. Filos-Ratsikas, S. Kristoffer Stiil Frederiksen, and J. Zhang. Social welfare in one-sided matchings: Random priority and beyond. In Proc. 7th International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT), pages 1-12, 2014. Google Scholar
  18. P. Gärdenfors. Assignment problem based on ordinal preferences. Management Science, 20(3):331-340, 1973. URL:
  19. A. Hylland and R. Zeckhauser. The efficient allocation of individuals to positions. Journal of Political Economy, 87(2):293-314, 1979. Google Scholar
  20. B. Kalyanasundaram and K. Pruhs. An optimal deterministic algorithm for online b-matching. Theoretical Computer Science, 233(1):319-325, 2000. Google Scholar
  21. R. M. Karp, U. V. Vazirani, and V. V. Vazirani. An optimal algorithm for on-line bipartite matching. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 352-358. ACM, 1990. Google Scholar
  22. P. Krysta, D. Manlove, B. Rastegari, and J. Zhang. Size versus truthfulness in the house allocation problem. In Proc. 15th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), pages 453-470. ACM, 2014. Google Scholar
  23. M. Mahdian and Q. Yan. Online bipartite matching with random arrivals: an approach based on strongly factor-revealing lps. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 597-606. ACM, 2011. Google Scholar
  24. A. Mehta, A. Saberi, U. Vazirani, and V. Vazirani. Adwords and generalized online matching. Journal of the ACM, 54(5):22, 2007. Google Scholar
  25. D. Saban and J. Sethuraman. House allocation with indifferences: a generalization and a unified view. In Proc. 14th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), pages 803-820. ACM, 2013. Google Scholar
  26. A. Schrijver. Combinatorial optimization: polyhedra and efficiency, volume 24. Springer, 2003. Google Scholar
  27. L. Zhou. On a conjecture by Gale about one-sided matching problems. Journal of Economic Theory, 52(1):123-135, 1990. Google Scholar