IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v48y2018i3p204-216.html

Allocating Students to Multidisciplinary Capstone Projects Using Discrete Optimization

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas L. Magnanti

    (Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore 487372; Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139)

  • Karthik Natarajan

    (Singapore University of Technology and Design, Singapore 487372)

Abstract

We discuss an allocation mechanism of capstone projects to senior-year undergraduate students, which the recently established Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) has implemented. A distinguishing feature of these projects is that they are multidisciplinary ; each project must involve students from at least two disciplines. This is an instance of a bipartite many-to-one matching problem with one-sided preferences and with additional lower and upper bounds on the number of students from the disciplines that must be matched to projects. This leads to challenges in applying many existing algorithms. We propose the use of discrete optimization to find an allocation that considers both efficiency and fairness. This provides flexibility in incorporating side constraints, which are often introduced in the final project allocation using inputs from the various stakeholders. Over a three-year period from 2015 to 2017, the average rank of the project allocated to the student is roughly halfway between their top two choices, with around 78 percent of the students assigned to projects in their top-three choices. We discuss practical design and optimization issues that arise in developing such an allocation.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas L. Magnanti & Karthik Natarajan, 2018. "Allocating Students to Multidisciplinary Capstone Projects Using Discrete Optimization," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 48(3), pages 204-216, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:48:y:2018:i:3:p:204-216
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.2017.0940
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.2017.0940
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.2017.0940?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. K R Baker & S G Powell, 2002. "Methods for assigning students to groups: a study of alternative objective functions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(4), pages 397-404, April.
    2. Michael F. Gorman, 2010. "The University of Dayton Operations Management Capstone Course: Undergraduate Student Field Consulting Applies Theory to Practice," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 432-443, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Dimitris Bertsimas & Vivek F. Farias & Nikolaos Trichakis, 2011. "The Price of Fairness," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 17-31, February.
    5. Dimitris Bertsimas & Vivek F. Farias & Nikolaos Trichakis, 2013. "Fairness, Efficiency, and Flexibility in Organ Allocation for Kidney Transplantation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 73-87, February.
    6. Andrew J Mason, 2013. "SolverStudio: A New Tool for Better Optimisation and Simulation Modelling in Excel," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 45-52, September.
    7. J. N. Hooker & H. P. Williams, 2012. "Combining Equity and Utilitarianism in a Mathematical Programming Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(9), pages 1682-1693, September.
    8. Hindriks, Jean & Myles, Gareth D., 2013. "Intermediate Public Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262018691, December.
    9. Rex Cutshall & Srinagesh Gavirneni & Kenneth Schultz, 2007. "Indiana University’s Kelley School of Business Uses Integer Programming to Form Equitable, Cohesive Student Teams," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 37(3), pages 265-276, June.
    10. Leo Lopes & Meredith Aronson & Gary Carstensen & Cole Smith, 2008. "Optimization Support for Senior Design Project Assignments," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 448-464, December.
    11. Nigar Hashimzade & Jean Hindriks & Gareth D. Myles, 2006. "Solutions Manual to Accompany Intermediate Public Economics," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262582694, December.
    12. Craig W. Kirkwood, 2004. "Selecting Student Project Teams When it Really Matters: An Optimization-Based Approach Using Internet Resources," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 9-27, May.
    13. Hanan Luss, 1999. "On Equitable Resource Allocation Problems: A Lexicographic Minimax Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 361-378, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Eric Budish & Gérard P. Cachon & Judd B. Kessler & Abraham Othman, 2017. "Course Match: A Large-Scale Implementation of Approximate Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes for Combinatorial Allocation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 314-336, April.
    16. Eric Budish & Yeon-Koo Che & Fuhito Kojima & Paul Milgrom, 2013. "Designing Random Allocation Mechanisms: Theory and Applications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 585-623, April.
    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. Nahid Rezaeinia & Julio César Góez & Mario Guajardo, 2022. "Efficiency and fairness criteria in the assignment of students to projects," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 319(2), pages 1717-1735, December.
    2. Christopher Garcia, 2019. "Practice Summary: Managing Capacity at the University of Mary Washington’s College of Business," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 49(2), pages 167-171, March.
    3. Schulz, Arne, 2021. "The balanced maximally diverse grouping problem with block constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 42-53.
    4. Andrew Bowers & Melissa R. Bowers & Nana Bryan & Paolo Letizia & Spencer Murphy, 2023. "Forming Student Teams to Incorporate Soft Skills and Commonality of Schedule," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(2), pages 111-127, March.

    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. Marta Boczoń & Alistair J. Wilson, 2023. "Goals, Constraints, and Transparently Fair Assignments: A Field Study of Randomization Design in the UEFA Champions League," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3474-3491, June.
    2. Th`anh Nguyen & Alexander Teytelboym & Shai Vardi, 2025. "Efficiency, Envy, and Incentives in Combinatorial Assignment," Papers 2509.13198, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    3. Nikhil Agarwal & Eric Budish, 2021. "Market Design," NBER Working Papers 29367, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Daniel Kornbluth & Alexey Kushnir, 2024. "Undergraduate Course Allocation through Competitive Markets," Papers 2412.05691, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2025.
    5. Karsu, Özlem & Morton, Alec, 2015. "Inequity averse optimization in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(2), pages 343-359.
    6. Miralles, Antonio & Pycia, Marek, 2021. "Foundations of pseudomarkets: Walrasian equilibria for discrete resources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    7. Bogomolnaia, Anna & Moulin, Herve, 2015. "Size versus fairness in the assignment problem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 119-127.
    8. Eun Jeong Heo & Vikram Manjunath, 2017. "Implementation in stochastic dominance Nash equilibria," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 5-30, January.
    9. Eric Budish & Judd B. Kessler, 2022. "Can Market Participants Report Their Preferences Accurately (Enough)?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1107-1130, February.
    10. Yusuke Narita, 2018. "Experiment-as-Market: Incorporating Welfare into Randomized Controlled Trials," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2127r, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised May 2019.
    11. Ortega, Josué, 2020. "Multi-unit assignment under dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 15-24.
    12. Shende, Priyanka & Purohit, Manish, 2023. "Strategy-proof and envy-free mechanisms for house allocation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    13. John P. Dickerson & Ariel D. Procaccia & Tuomas Sandholm, 2019. "Failure-Aware Kidney Exchange," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1768-1791, April.
    14. Zhan Wang & Jinpeng Ma & Hongwei Zhang, 2023. "Stable and envy-free lottery allocations for affordable housing," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 8(1), pages 1-55, December.
    15. Cole, Richard & Tao, Yixin, 2021. "On the existence of Pareto Efficient and envy-free allocations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    16. Holzer, Jorge & McConnell, Kenneth, 2023. "Extraction rights allocation with liquidity constraints," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    17. LAMAS, ALEJANDRO & CHEVALIER, Philippe, 2013. "Jumping the hurdles for collaboration: fairness in operations pooling in the absence of transfer payments," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2013073, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    18. Hussein El Hajj & Douglas R. Bish & Ebru K. Bish, 2021. "Equity in genetic newborn screening," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 68(1), pages 44-64, February.
    19. Onur Kesten & Morimitsu Kurino & Alexander S. Nesterov, 2017. "Efficient lottery design," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(1), pages 31-57, January.
    20. Can Zhang & Atalay Atasu & Turgay Ayer & L. Beril Toktay, 2020. "Truthful Mechanisms for Medical Surplus Product Allocation," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 735-753, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:orinte:v:48:y:2018:i:3:p:204-216. 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.