2013
DOI: 10.1142/s0219198913400082
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Matching With Couples: A Multidisciplinary Survey

Abstract: This survey deals with two-sided matching markets where one set of agents (workers/residents) has to be matched with another set of agents (firms/hospitals). We first give a short overview of a selection of classical results. Then, we review recent contributions to a complex and representative case of matching with complementarities, namely matching markets with couples. We discuss contributions from computer scientists, economists, and game theorists.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
34
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the special features of this program (and its counterparts in other countries, such as Scotland [34]) is that couples may submit joint applications for pair of positions. This feature makes the problem challenging to solve both in theory and practice (see more in a recent survey on this problem [10]). At the end of our paper we illustrate how the Scarf algorithm can be used as a heuristic for solving this problem.…”
Section: Related Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…One of the special features of this program (and its counterparts in other countries, such as Scotland [34]) is that couples may submit joint applications for pair of positions. This feature makes the problem challenging to solve both in theory and practice (see more in a recent survey on this problem [10]). At the end of our paper we illustrate how the Scarf algorithm can be used as a heuristic for solving this problem.…”
Section: Related Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In most papers on the hospitals residents problem with couples, the possibility of a couple applying to a pair of positions to the same hospital is neglected (see more details on this issue in [10]). However, this possibility is open in many current applications, such as the NRMP [27] or the Scottish resident allocation scheme (SFAS) [9].…”
Section: Paired Applications To the Same Hospitalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When considering matching problems involving ordinal preferences, the model that most closely resembles our problem is the Hospitals / Residents problem with Couples [6]. This underpins the problem of assigning medical graduates to their first hospital posts on the basis of two-sided preferences, when couples (i.e., pairs of applicants) are able to submit joint preferences over pairs of hospitals, typically in order to be matched to geographically close positions.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several attempts have been made to obtain positive results, such as determining a preference domain for existence (Klaus and Klijn [33]) and considering a large market (Kojima et al [36]). We refer the reader to Biró and Klijn [9] for a comprehensive survey on this topic. We remark here that since the model of matching with couples treats a couple as a single agent instead of two separate agents, there are subtle differences in the stability concepts of the model with couples with those in the model with externalities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Currently, there are many surveys and books on matching problems. To our knowledge, the list includes books by Roth and Sotomayor [59] and Gusfield and Irving [26] and surveys by Roth [56] and Roth [54] for general two-sided matching problems; Biró and Klijn [9] for matching problems with couples; and in relation to market design, which uses among many theories the theory of two-sided matching to solve real-life problems involving markets, there are Roth [55] and Roth [57]. In contrast, while the literature on matching with externalities has grown recently, to our knowledge, there is no survey that provides an overall perspective on the topic.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%