IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.28174.html

Minimally rational reallocation of objects

Author

Listed:
  • Ozgun Ekici
  • M. Bumin Yenmez

Abstract

Matching theory has largely evolved around two canonical rules: deferred acceptance (DA) in the marriage problem and top trading cycles (TTC) in the object reallocation problem. Although the two rules operate through different procedures, we show that they rest on a common axiomatic foundation. In the marriage problem, stability decomposes into individual rationality and pair rationality, and a classic result characterizes DA by these two axioms together with strategy-proofness for the proposing side. We show that individual rationality, pair rationality, and strategy-proofness likewise characterize TTC. More strongly, three weak rationality axioms concerning individuals and pairs, together with strategy-proofness, uniquely determine TTC. Even weak rationality requirements therefore rule out strategy-proof implementation when there is a cap on the size of exchange cycles.

Suggested Citation

  • Ozgun Ekici & M. Bumin Yenmez, 2026. "Minimally rational reallocation of objects," Papers 2609.28174, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.28174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.28174
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Szilvia Papai, 2000. "Strategyproof Assignment by Hierarchical Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1403-1434, November.
    2. Shapley, Lloyd & Scarf, Herbert, 1974. "On cores and indivisibility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 23-37, March.
    3. Pycia, Marek & Unver, Utku, 2017. "Incentive compatible allocation and exchange of discrete resources," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(1), January.
    4. Thayer Morrill, 2013. "An alternative characterization of top trading cycles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(1), pages 181-197, September.
    5. Alcalde, Jose & Barbera, Salvador, 1994. "Top Dominance and the Possibility of Strategy-Proof Stable Solutions to Matching Problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 4(3), pages 417-435, May.
    6. Ivan Balbuzanov & Maciej H. Kotowski, 2019. "Endowments, Exclusion, and Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(5), pages 1663-1692, September.
    7. Itai Ashlagi & Alvin E. Roth, 2021. "Kidney Exchange: An Operations Perspective," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5455-5478, September.
    8. Ekici, Özgün, 2024. "Pair-efficient reallocation of indivisible objects," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 19(2), May.
    9. Papai, Szilvia, 2007. "Exchange in a general market with indivisible goods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 208-235, January.
    10. Ma, Jinpeng, 1994. "Strategy-Proofness and the Strict Core in a Market with Indivisibilities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 23(1), pages 75-83.
    11. Ekici, Özgün & Sethuraman, Jay, 2024. "Characterizing the TTC rule via pair-efficiency: A short proof," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    12. Miyagawa, Eiichi, 2002. "Strategy-Proofness and the Core in House Allocation Problems," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 347-361, February.
    13. Roth, Alvin E. & Postlewaite, Andrew, 1977. "Weak versus strong domination in a market with indivisible goods," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 131-137, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sumit Goel & Yuki Tamura, 2025. "TTC Domains," Papers 2501.15422, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2026.
    2. Morrill, Thayer & Roth, Alvin E., 2024. "Top trading cycles," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Chen, Yajing & Jiao, Zhenhua & Zhang, Chenfeng & Zhang, Luosai, 2025. "Some new characterizations of top trading cycles," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    4. Ekici, Özgün & Sethuraman, Jay, 2024. "Characterizing the TTC rule via pair-efficiency: A short proof," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    5. Fujinaka, Yuji & Wakayama, Takuma, 2018. "Endowments-swapping-proof house allocation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 187-202.
    6. Ishida, Wataru & Park, Changwoo, 2026. "Group incentive-compatible allocation of discrete resources when ownership is partitioned," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 287-309.
    7. Tang, Qianfeng & Zhu, Zhan, 2025. "Ekici’s reclaim-proof allocations revisited," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    8. Demeulemeester, Tom & Klaus, Bettina, 0. "Pairwise efficiency and monotonicity imply Pareto efficiency in (probabilistic) object allocation," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society.
    9. Jaramillo, Paula & Manjunath, Vikram, 2012. "The difference indifference makes in strategy-proof allocation of objects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(5), pages 1913-1946.
    10. Sun, Xiang & Tang, Qianfeng & Xiao, Mingjun & Zhang, Jun, 2026. "On the core of markets with co-ownerships and indivisibilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 232(C).
    11. Mustafa Oǧuz Afacan, 2019. "Matching with restricted trade," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(3), pages 957-977, September.
    12. Tayfun Sönmez & M. Utku Ünver, 2006. "Kidney Exchange with Good Samaritan Donors: A Characterization," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 640, Boston College Department of Economics.
    13. Feng, Di & Klaus, Bettina & Klijn, Flip, 2024. "Characterizing the typewise top-trading-cycles mechanism for multiple-type housing markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 234-254.
    14. Louise Demoor & Mart'i Jan'e-Ballar'in & Pierre Nunn & Subhajit Pramanik & Antoine Pr'evotat & Makoto Yokoo, 2026. "Non-obvious Manipulability with Groups in Shapley-Scarf Housing Markets," Papers 2608.15631, arXiv.org.
    15. Sönmez, Tayfun & Ünver, M. Utku, 2010. "House allocation with existing tenants: A characterization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 425-445, July.
    16. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Tommy Andersson, 2022. "School Choice," NBER Working Papers 29822, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Sonmez, Tayfun & Utku Unver, M., 2005. "House allocation with existing tenants: an equivalence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 153-185, July.
    18. Feng, Di, 2025. "Efficiency in multiple-type housing markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    19. Ekici, Özgün, 2024. "Pair-efficient reallocation of indivisible objects," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 19(2), May.
    20. Patrick Harless & William Phan, 2020. "On endowments and indivisibility: partial ownership in the Shapley–Scarf model," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(2), pages 411-435, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2609.28174. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.