Incentive-Compatible Kidney Exchange in a Slightly Semi-Random Model
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Motivated by kidney exchange, we study the following mechanism-design problem: On a directed graph (of transplant compatibilities among patient-donor pairs), the mechanism must select a simple path (a chain of transplantations) starting at a distinguished vertex (an altruistic donor) such that the total length of this path is as large as possible (a maximum number of patients receive a kidney). However, the mechanism does not have direct access to the graph. Instead, the vertices are partitioned over multiple players (hospitals), and each player reports a subset of her vertices to the mechanism. In particular, a player may strategically omit vertices to increase how many of her vertices lie on the path returned by the mechanism. Our objective is to find mechanisms that limit incentives for such manipulation while producing long paths. Unfortunately, in worst-case instances, competing with the overall longest path is impossible while incentivizing (approximate) truthfulness, i.e., requiring that hiding nodes cannot increase a player's utility by more than a factor of 1 + o(1). We therefore adopt a semi-random model where a small (o(n)) number of random edges are added to worst-case instances. While it remains impossible for truthful mechanisms to compete with the overall longest path, we give a truthful mechanism that competes with a weaker but non-trivial benchmark: the length of any path whose subpaths within each player have a minimum average length. In fact, our mechanism satisfies even a stronger notion of truthfulness, which we call matching-time incentive compatibility. This notion of truthfulness requires that each player not only reports her nodes truthfully but also does not stop the returned path at any of her nodes in order to divert it to a continuation inside her own subgraph.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 21 Jun 2021.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 2.
4 papers.
- 2024Data Distribution Valuationcited by 5
- 2026Position: Machine Learning for Heart Transplant Allocation Policy Optimization Should Account for Incentivescited by 4
- 2026Learning Potentials for Dynamic Matching and Application to Heart Transplantationcited by 3
- 2023Incentivized Collaboration in Active Learningcited by 0
- 2026Learning Potentials for Dynamic Matching and Application to Heart Transplantation9 Feb 2026
- 2026Position: Machine Learning for Heart Transplant Allocation Policy Optimization Should Account for Incentives4 Feb 2026
- 2024Data Distribution Valuation6 Oct 2024
- 2023Incentivized Collaboration in Active Learning1 Nov 2023