IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v62y2016i4p1078-1097.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Allocation Without Money: An Engineering Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Itai Ashlagi

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

  • Peng Shi

    (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

Abstract

We study the allocation of heterogeneous services to agents with incomplete information and without monetary transfers. Agents have private, multidimensional utilities over services, drawn from commonly known priors. The social planner’s goal is to maximize a potentially complex public objective. For tractability, we take an “engineering” approach, in which we solve a large-market approximation, and convert the solution into a feasible finite-market mechanism that still yields good results. We apply this framework to real data from Boston to design a mechanism that assigns students to public schools, in order to maximize a linear combination of utilitarian and max-min welfare, subject to capacity and transportation constraints. We show how to optimally solve a large-market formulation with more than 868 types of students and 77 schools, and we translate the solution into a finite-market mechanism that significantly outperforms the baseline plan chosen by the city in terms of efficiency, equity, and predictability.Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2162 . This paper was accepted by Martin Lariviere, operations management.

Suggested Citation

  • Itai Ashlagi & Peng Shi, 2016. "Optimal Allocation Without Money: An Engineering Approach," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(4), pages 1078-1097, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:62:y:2016:i:4:p:1078-1097
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2015.2162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2162
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2162?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric Budish & Estelle Cantillon, 2012. "The Multi-unit Assignment Problem: Theory and Evidence from Course Allocation at Harvard," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2237-2271, August.
    2. Atila Abdulkadiro?lu & Yeon-Koo Che & Yosuke Yasuda, 2015. "Expanding "Choice" in School Choice," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 1-42, February.
    3. Ehlers, Lars & Hafalir, Isa E. & Yenmez, M. Bumin & Yildirim, Muhammed A., 2014. "School choice with controlled choice constraints: Hard bounds versus soft bounds," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 648-683.
    4. Acemoglu,Daron & Arellano,Manuel & Dekel,Eddie (ed.), 2013. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107016064.
    5. Miralles, Antonio, 2012. "Cardinal Bayesian allocation mechanisms without transfers," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 179-206.
    6. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Strategy-proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the New York City High School Match," NBER Working Papers 14864, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Acemoglu,Daron & Arellano,Manuel & Dekel,Eddie (ed.), 2013. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107638105.
    8. Federico Echenique & M. Bumin Yenmez, 2015. "How to Control Controlled School Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(8), pages 2679-2694, August.
    9. Bogomolnaia, Anna & Moulin, Herve, 2001. "A New Solution to the Random Assignment Problem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 295-328, October.
    10. Acemoglu,Daron & Arellano,Manuel & Dekel,Eddie (ed.), 2013. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107016057.
    11. Chakravarty, Surajeet & Kaplan, Todd R., 2013. "Optimal allocation without transfer payments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 1-20.
    12. Heidrun C. Hoppe & Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela, 2009. "The Theory of Assortative Matching Based on Costly Signals," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 253-281.
    13. Aytek Erdil & Haluk Ergin, 2008. "What's the Matter with Tie-Breaking? Improving Efficiency in School Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(3), pages 669-689, June.
    14. , A. & ,, 2011. "Lotteries in student assignment: An equivalence result," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(1), January.
    15. Zhou, Lin, 1992. "Strictly fair allocations in large exchange economies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 158-175.
    16. Acemoglu,Daron & Arellano,Manuel & Dekel,Eddie (ed.), 2013. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107674165.
    17. Constantinos Maglaras & Assaf Zeevi, 2005. "Pricing and Design of Differentiated Services: Approximate Analysis and Structural Insights," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 242-262, April.
    18. Ohad Perry & Ward Whitt, 2009. "Responding to Unexpected Overloads in Large-Scale Service Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1353-1367, August.
    19. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth & Tayfun Sönmez, 2006. "Changing the Boston School Choice Mechanism," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 639, Boston College Department of Economics.
    20. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    21. Itai Ashlagi & Peng Shi, 2014. "Improving Community Cohesion in School Choice via Correlated-Lottery Implementation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1247-1264, December.
    22. Thompson, W. & Zhou, L., 1991. "Consistent Allocation Rules in Atomless Economies," RCER Working Papers 294, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
    23. Clarke, S. & Surkis, J., 1968. "An operations research approach to racial desegregation of school systems," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 259-272, July.
    24. Acemoglu,Daron & Arellano,Manuel & Dekel,Eddie (ed.), 2013. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107627314.
    25. Acemoglu,Daron & Arellano,Manuel & Dekel,Eddie (ed.), 2013. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107016040.
    26. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Parag A. Pathak & Alvin E. Roth, 2009. "Strategy-Proofness versus Efficiency in Matching with Indifferences: Redesigning the NYC High School Match," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1954-1978, December.
    27. Condorelli, Daniele, 2012. "What money canʼt buy: Efficient mechanism design with costly signals," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 613-624.
    28. Hylland, Aanund & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1979. "The Efficient Allocation of Individuals to Positions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(2), pages 293-314, April.
    29. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    30. F Caro & T Shirabe & M Guignard & A Weintraub, 2004. "School redistricting: embedding GIS tools with integer programming," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(8), pages 836-849, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jacquillat, Alexandre & Vaze, Vikrant & Wang, Weilong, 2022. "Primary versus secondary infrastructure capacity allocation mechanisms," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(2), pages 668-687.
    2. Will Ma, 2023. "When Is Assortment Optimization Optimal?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2088-2105, April.
    3. Biró, Péter & Gudmundsson, Jens, 2021. "Complexity of finding Pareto-efficient allocations of highest welfare," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 614-628.
    4. Julien Combe & Vladyslav Nora & Olivier Tercieux, 2021. "Dynamic assignment without money: Optimality of spot mechanisms," Working Papers 2021-11, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    5. Alfonso J. Pedraza-Martinez & Sameer Hasija & Luk N. Van Wassenhove, 2020. "Fleet Coordination in Decentralized Humanitarian Operations Funded by Earmarked Donations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 984-999, July.
    6. Miralles, Antonio & Pycia, Marek, 2021. "Foundations of pseudomarkets: Walrasian equilibria for discrete resources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    7. Hai Nguyen & Thành Nguyen & Alexander Teytelboym, 2021. "Stability in Matching Markets with Complex Constraints," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7438-7454, December.
    8. Demeulemeester, Tom & Goossens, Dries & Hermans, Ben & Leus, Roel, 2023. "A pessimist’s approach to one-sided matching," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(3), pages 1087-1099.
    9. Caterina Calsamiglia & Francisco Martínez-Mora & Antonio Miralles, 2021. "Random assignments and outside options," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(3), pages 557-566, October.
    10. Caterina Calsamiglia & Francisco Martinez-Mora & Antonio Miralles, 2020. "Cardinal Assignment Mechanisms: Money Matters More than it Should," Working Papers 1150, Barcelona School of Economics.
    11. Ruomeng Cui & Jun Li & Dennis J. Zhang, 2020. "Reducing Discrimination with Reviews in the Sharing Economy: Evidence from Field Experiments on Airbnb," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1071-1094, March.
    12. K. Drakopoulos & R. S. Randhawa, 2021. "Why Perfect Tests May Not Be Worth Waiting For: Information as a Commodity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6678-6693, November.
    13. Martin Bichler & Soeren Merting, 2021. "Randomized Scheduling Mechanisms: Assigning Course Seats in a Fair and Efficient Way," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(10), pages 3540-3559, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nikhil Agarwal & Eric Budish, 2021. "Market Design," NBER Working Papers 29367, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Masahiro Goto & Fuhito Kojima & Ryoji Kurata & Akihisa Tamura & Makoto Yokoo, 2017. "Designing Matching Mechanisms under General Distributional Constraints," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 226-262, May.
    3. Georgios Gerasimou, 2019. "Simple Preference Intensity Comparisons," Discussion Paper Series, School of Economics and Finance 201905, School of Economics and Finance, University of St Andrews, revised 27 Apr 2020.
    4. Itai Ashlagi & Peng Shi, 2014. "Improving Community Cohesion in School Choice via Correlated-Lottery Implementation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1247-1264, December.
    5. Özalp Özer & Upender Subramanian & Yu Wang, 2018. "Information Sharing, Advice Provision, or Delegation: What Leads to Higher Trust and Trustworthiness?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 474-493, January.
    6. Kesten, Onur & Unver, Utku, 2015. "A theory of school choice lotteries," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(2), May.
    7. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2015. "Patent rights, product market reforms, and innovation," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 223-262, September.
    8. Jacopo Perego & Sevgi Yuksel, 2022. "Media Competition and Social Disagreement," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 223-265, January.
    9. Joshua D. Angrist & Peter D. Hull & Parag A. Pathak & Christopher R. Walters, 2017. "Leveraging Lotteries for School Value-Added: Testing and Estimation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 871-919.
    10. Yan Chen & Peter Cramton & John A. List & Axel Ockenfels, 2021. "Market Design, Human Behavior, and Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5317-5348, September.
    11. Lim, Wooyoung, 2014. "Communication in bargaining over decision rights," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 159-179.
    12. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 2016. "Whither Game Theory? Towards a Theory of Learning in Games," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 151-170, Fall.
    13. Fuhito Kojima & M. Ünver, 2014. "The “Boston” school-choice mechanism: an axiomatic approach," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(3), pages 515-544, April.
    14. Rohit Lamba & Ilia Krasikov, 2017. "A Theory of Dynamic Contracting with Financial Constraints," 2017 Meeting Papers 1544, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    15. Elsby, Michael W.L. & Hobijn, Bart & Şahin, Ayşegül, 2015. "On the importance of the participation margin for labor market fluctuations," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 64-82.
    16. Wen Xu, 2016. "Estimation of Dynamic Panel Data Models with Stochastic Volatility Using Particle Filters," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-13, October.
    17. Özgür Orhangazi & A. Erinç Yeldan, 2021. "The Re‐making of the Turkish Crisis," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 52(3), pages 460-503, May.
    18. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    19. Alessandra Bonfiglioli & Rosario Crinò & Gino Gancia, 2018. "Firms and Economic Performance: A view from Trade," Working Papers 1034, Barcelona School of Economics.
    20. Guriev, Sergei & Treisman, Daniel, 2020. "A theory of informational autocracy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:62:y:2016:i:4:p:1078-1097. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.