Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 37 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 41 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 10 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 15 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 84 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 198 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 448 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Stable Nash Equilibria in the Gale-Shapley Matching Game (1509.04344v1)

Published 14 Sep 2015 in cs.DS and cs.GT

Abstract: In this article we study the stable marriage game induced by the men-proposing Gale-Shapley algorithm. Our setting is standard: all the lists are complete and the matching mechanism is the men-proposing Gale-Shapley algorithm. It is well known that in this setting, men cannot cheat, but women can. In fact, Teo, Sethuraman and Tan \cite{TST01}, show that there is a polynomial time algorithm to obtain, for a given strategy (the set of all lists) $Q$ and a woman $w$, the best partner attainable by changing her list. However, what if the resulting matching is not stable with respect to $Q$? Obviously, such a matching would be vulnerable to further manipulation, but is not mentioned in \cite{TST01}. In this paper, we consider (safe) manipulation that implies a stable matching in a most general setting. Specifically, our goal is to decide for a given $Q$, if w can manipulate her list to obtain a strictly better partner with respect to the true strategy $P$ (which may be different from $Q$), and also the outcome is a stable matching for $P$.

Citations (4)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.