skip to main content
research-article

Competitive equilibria in matching markets with budgets

Published:01 June 2010Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Consider a market with n unit demand buyers and m sellers, each selling one unit of an indivisible good. The buyers specify their preferences over items via utility functions uij(pj), which is the utility of buyer i for item j when its price is pj. So far, this is the classic Shapley-Shubik assignment model [Shapley and Shubik 1971] which captures a variety of matching markets including housing markets and ad auctions [Edelman et al. 2007], except for the extension to general utility functions instead of the quasi-linear utilities in the original model. Shapley and Shubik show that a competitive equilibrium always exists in their model, and later work [Crawford and Knoer 1981, Quinnzi 1984, Gale 1984] shows that a competitive equilibrium must also exist for the model with general utility functions uij(·), provided these uij(·) are strictly decreasing and continuous everywhere.

References

  1. G. Aggarwal, S. Muthukrishnan, D. Pal, M. Pal, General Auction Mechanism for Search Advertising, WWW 2009, 241--250. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. N. Chen, X. Deng, A. Ghosh, Competitive Equilibria in Matching Markets with Budgets, http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.2565v2.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. V. Crawford, E. Knoer, Job Matching with Heterogeneous Firms and Workers, Econometrica, V.49(2), 437--450, 1981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. G. Demange, D. Gale, The Strategy of Two-Sided Matching Markets, Econometrica, V.53, 873--888, 1985.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. S. Dobzinski, R. Lavi, N. Nisan, Multi-Unit Auctions with Budget Limits, FOCS 2008, 260--269. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. B. Edelman, M. Ostrovsky, M. Schwarz, Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction, American Economic Review, 97(1), 242--259, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. D. Gale, Equilibrium in a Discrete Exchange Economy with Money, International Journal of Game Theory, V.13, 61--64, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. D. Gale, L. Shapley, College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage, American Mathematical Monthly, V.69, 9--15, 1962.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. R. W. Irving, Stable Marriage and Indifference, Discrete Applied Mathematics, V.48, 261--272, 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. M. Quinzii, Core and Competitive Equilibria with Indivisibilities, International Journal of Game Theory, V.13, 41--60, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. L. Shapley, M. Shubik, The Assignment Game I: The Core, International Journal of Game Theory, V.1(1), 111--130, 1971.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Competitive equilibria in matching markets with budgets

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM SIGecom Exchanges
          ACM SIGecom Exchanges  Volume 9, Issue 1
          June 2010
          41 pages
          EISSN:1551-9031
          DOI:10.1145/1980534
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2010 Authors

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 1 June 2010

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader