REVIEW 1 cited by
Group-level Fairness Maximization in Online Bipartite Matching
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Group-level Fairness Maximization in Online Bipartite Matching
read the original abstract
We consider the allocation of limited resources to heterogeneous customers who arrive in an online fashion. We would like to allocate the resources "fairly", so that no group of customers is marginalized in terms of their overall service rate. We study whether this is possible to do so in an online fashion, and if so, what a good online allocation policy is. We model this problem using online bipartite matching under stationary arrivals, a fundamental model in the literature typically studied under the objective of maximizing the total number of customers served. We instead study the objective of maximizing the minimum service rate across all groups, and propose two notions of fairness: long-run and short-run. For these fairness objectives, we analyze how competitive online algorithms can be, in comparison to offline algorithms which know the sequence of demands in advance. For long-run fairness, we propose two online heuristics (Sampling and Pooling) which establish asymptotic optimality in different regimes (no specialized supplies, no rare demand types, or imbalanced supply/demand). By contrast, outside all of these regimes, we show that the competitive ratio of online algorithms is between 0.632 and 0.732. For short-run fairness, we show for complete bipartite graphs that the competitive ratio of online algorithms is between 0.863 and 0.942; we also derive a probabilistic rejection algorithm which is asymptotically optimal in the total demand. Depending on the overall scarcity of resources, either our Sampling or Pooling heuristics could be desirable. The most difficult situation for online allocation occurs when the total supply is just enough to serve the total demand. We simulate our algorithms on a public ride-hailing dataset, which both demonstrates the efficacy of our heuristics and validates our managerial insights.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Learning Fair Demand Models
Compares enforcing parity-wise and Rawlsian fairness in demand estimation versus price optimization stages in a linear demand pricing model, characterizing conditions for higher social welfare and showing coincidence ...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.