arXiv++ Combinatorics

We study popular matchings in three classical settings: the house allocation problem, the marriage problem, and the roommates problem. In the popular matching problem, (a subset of) the vertices in a graph have preference orderings over their potential matches. A matching is popular if it gets a plurality of votes in a pairwise election against any other matching. Unfortunately, popular matchings typically do not exist. So we study a natural relaxation, namely popular winning sets which are a set of matchings that collectively get a plurality of votes in a pairwise election against any other matching. The $\textit{popular dimension}$ is the minimum cardinality of a popular winning set, in the worst case over the problem class. We prove that the popular dimension is exactly $2$ in the house allocation problem, even if the voters are weighted and ties are allowed in their preference lists. For the marriage problem and the roommates problem, we prove that the popular dimension is between $2$ and $3$, when the agents are weighted and/or their preferences orderings allow ties. In the special case where the agents are unweighted and have strict preference orderings, the popular dimension of the marriage problem is known to be exactly $1$ and we prove the popular dimension of the roommates problem is exactly $2$.

We study the stable matching problem under the random matching model where the preferences of the doctors and hospitals are sampled uniformly and independently at random. In a balanced market with $n$ doctors and $n$ hospitals, the doctor-proposal deferred-acceptance algorithm gives doctors an expected rank of order $\log n$ for their partners and hospitals an expected rank of order $\frac{n}{\log n}$ for their partners. This situation is reversed in an unbalanced market with $n+1$ doctors and $n$ hospitals, a phenomenon known as the short-side advantage. The current proofs of this fact are indirect, counter-intuitively being based upon analyzing the hospital-proposal deferred-acceptance algorithm. In this paper we provide a direct proof of the short-side advantage, explicitly analyzing the doctor-proposal deferred-acceptance algorithm. Our proof sheds light on how and why the phenomenon arises.

A cornerstone of social choice theory is Condorcet's paradox which says that in an election where $n$ voters rank $m$ candidates it is possible that, no matter which candidate is declared the winner, a majority of voters would have preferred an alternative candidate. Instead, can we always choose a small committee of winning candidates that is preferred to any alternative candidate by a majority of voters? Elkind, Lang, and Saffidine raised this question and called such a committee a Condorcet winning set. They showed that winning sets of size $2$ may not exist, but sets of size logarithmic in the number of candidates always do. In this work, we show that Condorcet winning sets of size $6$ always exist, regardless of the number of candidates or the number of voters. More generally, we show that if $\fracα{1 - \ln α} \geq \frac{2}{k + 1}$, then there always exists a committee of size $k$ such that less than an $α$ fraction of the voters prefer an alternate candidate. These are the first nontrivial positive results that apply for all $k \geq 2$. Our proof uses the probabilistic method and the minimax theorem, inspired by recent work on approximately stable committee selection. We construct a distribution over committees that performs sufficiently well (when compared against any candidate on any small subset of the voters) so that this distribution must contain a committee with the desired property in its support.

A graph $G=(V,E)$ is a $k$-leaf power if there is a tree $T$ whose leaves are the vertices of $G$ with the property that a pair of leaves $u$ and $v$ induce an edge in $G$ if and only if they are distance at most $k$ apart in $T$. For $k\le 4$, it is known that there exists a finite set $F_k$ of graphs such that the class $L(k)$ of $k$-leaf power graphs is characterized as the set of strongly chordal graphs that do not contain any graph in $F_k$ as an induced subgraph. We prove no such characterization holds for $k\ge 5$. That is, for any $k\ge 5$, there is no finite set $F_k$ of graphs such that $L(k)$ is equivalent to the set of strongly chordal graphs that do not contain as an induced subgraph any graph in $F_k$.

In the famous network creation game of Fabrikant et al. a set of agents play a game to build a connected graph. The $n$ agents form the vertex set $V$ of the graph and each vertex $v\in V$ buys a set $E_v$ of edges inducing a graph $G=(V,\bigcup\limits_{v\in V} E_v)$. The private objective of each vertex is to minimize the sum of its building cost (the cost of the edges it buys) plus its connection cost (the total distance from itself to every other vertex). Given a cost of $α$ for each individual edge, a long-standing conjecture, called the tree conjecture, states that if $α> n$ then every Nash equilibrium graph in the game is a spanning tree. After a plethora of work, it is known that the conjecture holds for any $α>3n-3$. In this paper we prove the tree conjecture holds for $α>2n$. This reduces by half the open range for $α$ with only $[n, 2n)$ remaining in order to settle the conjecture.

The set of stable matchings induces a distributive lattice. The supremum of the stable matching lattice is the boy-optimal (girl-pessimal) stable matching and the infimum is the girl-optimal (boy-pessimal) stable matching. The classical boy-proposal deferred-acceptance algorithm returns the supremum of the lattice, that is, the boy-optimal stable matching. In this paper, we study the smallest group of girls, called the {\em minimum winning coalition of girls}, that can act strategically, but independently, to force the boy-proposal deferred-acceptance algorithm to output the girl-optimal stable matching. We characterize the minimum winning coalition in terms of stable matching rotations and show that its cardinality can take on any value between $0$ and $\left\lfloor \frac{n}{2}\right\rfloor$, for instances with $n$ boys and $n$ girls. Our main result is that, for the random matching model, the expected cardinality of the minimum winning coalition is $(\frac{1}{2}+o(1))\log{n}$. This resolves a conjecture of Kupfer \cite{Kup18}.

We prove that for any constant $k$ and any $ε<1$, there exist bimatrix win-lose games for which every $ε$-WSNE requires supports of cardinality greater than $k$. To do this, we provide a graph-theoretic characterization of win-lose games that possess $ε$-WSNE with constant cardinality supports. We then apply a result in additive number theory of Haight to construct win-lose games that do not satisfy the requirements of the characterization. These constructions disprove graph theoretic conjectures of Daskalakis, Mehta and Papadimitriou, and Myers.

We examine cooperative games where the viability of a coalition is determined by whether or not its members have the ability to communicate amongst themselves independently of non-members. This necessary condition for viability was proposed by Myerson (1977) and is modeled via an interaction graph $G=(V,E)$; a coalition $S\subseteq V$ is then viable if and only if the induced graph $G[S]$ is connected. The non-emptiness of the core of a coalition game can be tested by a well-known covering LP. Moreover, the integrality gap of its dual packing LP defines exactly the multiplicative least-core and the relative cost of stability of the coalition game. This gap is upper bounded by the packing-covering ratio which, for graphical coalition games, is known to be at most the treewidth of the interaction graph plus one (Meir et al. 2013). We examine the packing-covering ratio and integrality gaps of graphical coalition games in more detail. We introduce the thicket parameter of a graph, and prove it precisely measures the packing-covering ratio. It also approximately measures the primal and dual integrality gaps. The thicket number provides an upper bound of both integrality gaps. Moreover we show that for any interaction graph, the primal integrality gap is, in the worst case, linear in terms of the thicket number while the dual integrality gap is polynomial in terms of it. At the heart of our results, is a graph theoretic minmax theorem showing the thicket number is equal to the minimum width of a vine decomposition of the coalition graph (a vine decomposition is a generalization of a tree decomposition). We also explain how the thicket number relates to the VC-dimension of the set system produced by the game.