Talk:Stable matching problem: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:46, 24 August 2016

Revision as of 04:46, 17 February 2017

Line 7:

In this sections it is claimed "The traditional form of the algorithm is optimal for the initiator of the proposals and the stable, suitor-optimal solution may or may not be optimal for the reviewer of the proposals.".

I am not sure this is sufficiently clear. In fact it seems quite misleading. If the initiators (suitors) do not collude, in some cases they end up strictly worse off if the follow the letter of the algorithm. So it is in their interest to agree to lie about their preferences so that they all get better outcomes. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Mircea85|Mircea85]] ([[User talk:Mircea85|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mircea85|contribs]]) 01:56, 1 August 2015 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Running the described algorithm, wouldn't the reviewers end up with their preferences (and not the suitors)? Here is what I find when I run the algorithm with the provided dataset.

Round 1: A-Y, B-Z, C-X; Round 2: A-X, B-Y, D-Z; Round 3: A-Z, B-X, C-Y. A, B, and C are getting their preferred partner. X, Y, and Z are getting their least-preferred partner.

[[User:EatsMeat|EatsMeat]] ([[User talk:EatsMeat|talk]]) 04:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

== Uniqueness of solution ==