House allocation with existing tenants: A characterization

Games and Economic Behavior

Volumn 69, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 425-445

  Sönmez, Tayfun ^a   Ünver, M Utku ^a  

^a BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Consistency; House allocation; Individual rationality; Matching; Neutrality; Pareto efficiency; Strategy proofness

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953546159     PISSN: 08998256     EISSN: 10902473     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2009.10.010     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Abdulkadiroĝlu A., Sönmez T. House allocation with existing tenants. J. Econ. Theory 1999, 88:233-260.
2. Chambers C. Consistency in the probabilistic assignment model. J. Math. Econ. 2004, 40:953-962.
3. Chen Y., Sönmez T. Improving efficiency of on-campus housing: An experimental study. Amer. Econ. Rev. 2002, 92(5):1669-1686.
4. Dagan, N., 1995. Consistent solutions in exchange economies: A characterization of the price mechanism. Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Economics working paper: 141.
5. Ehlers L. Coalitional strategy-proof house allocation. J. Econ. Theory 2002, 105:298-317.
6. Ehlers L., Klaus B. Consistent house allocation. Econ. Theory 2007, 30:561-574.
7. Ehlers L., Klaus B., Pápai S. Strategy-proofness and population-monotonicity in house allocation problems. J. Math. Econ. 2002, 38:329-339.
8. Ergin H. Consistency in house allocation problems. J. Math. Econ. 2000, 34:77-97.
9. Hylland A., Zeckhauser R. The efficient allocation of individuals to positions. J. Polit. Economy 1979, 87:293-314.
10. Kesten O. Coalitional strategy-proofness and resource monotonicity for house allocation problems. Int. J. Game Theory 2009, 38:17-21.
11. Ma J. Strategy-proofness and strict core in a market with indivisibilities. Int. J. Game Theory 1994, 23:75-83.
12. Miyagawa E. Strategy-proofness and the core in house allocation problems. Games Econ. Behav. 2002, 38:347-361.
13. Pápai S. Strategyproof assignment by hierarchical exchange. Econometrica 2000, 68:1403-1433.
14. Pápai S. Exchange in a general market with indivisible goods. J. Econ. Theory 2007, 132:208-235.
15. Pycia M., Ünver M.U. A theory of house allocation and exchange mechanisms (December 30, 2007). Available at SSRN. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1079505.
16. Roth A.E. Incentive compatibility in a market with indivisible goods. Econ. Letters 1982, 9:127-132.
17. Roth A.E., Postlewaite A. Weak versus strong domination in a market with indivisible goods. J. Math. Econ. 1977, 4:131-137.
18. Roth A.E., Sönmez T., Ünver M.U. Kidney exchange. Quart. J. Econ. 2004, 119:457-488.
19. Shapley L., Scarf H. On cores and indivisibility. J. Math. Econ. 1974, 1:23-28.
20. Sönmez T., Ünver M.U. House allocation with existing tenants: An equivalence. Games Econ. Behav. 2006, 52:153-185.
21. Sönmez T., Ünver M.U. Kidney exchange with good Samaritan donors: A characterization Boston College and University of Pittsburgh working paper: Available at. http://ideas.repec.org/p/boc/bocoec/640.html.
22. Svensson L.-G. Strategy-proof allocation of indivisible goods. Soc. Choice Welfare 1999, 16:557-567.
23. Thomson, W., 1992. Consistency in exchange economies. Mimeo.
24. Thomson, W., 1996. Consistent allocation rules. University of Rochester working paper.
25. Velez-Cordona, R., 2006. Revisiting consistency in house allocation problems. University of Rochester working paper.