On the Optimal Design of a Bipartite Matching Queueing System

References

• Adan I, Weiss G (2012) Exact FCFS matching rates for two infinite multitytpe sequences. Oper. Res. 60(2):475–489.Link, Google Scholar
• Adan I, Weiss G (2014) A skill based parallel service system under FCFS-ALIS – steady state, overloads and abandonments. Stochastic Systems 4(1):250–299.Link, Google Scholar
• Adan I, Boon M, Weiss G (2019) Design heuristic for parallel many server systems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 273(1):259–277.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adan I, Bušić A, Mairesse J, Weiss G (2018a) Reversibility and further properties of FCFS infinite bipartite matching. Math. Oper. Res. 43(2):598–621.Link, Google Scholar
• Adan I, Kleiner I, Righter R, Weiss G (2018b) FCFS parallel service systems and matching models. Performance Evaluation vols. 127-128:253–272.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Afèche P, Liu Z, Maglaras C (2018) Ride-hailing networks with strategic drivers: The impact of platform control capabilities on performance. SSRN paper No. 3120544, 56 p.Google Scholar
• Akan M, Alagoz O, Ata B, Erenay FS, Said A (2012) A broader view of the liver allocation system incorporating disease evolution. Oper. Res. 60(4):757–770.Link, Google Scholar
• Akbarpour M, Li S, Oveis Gharan S (2020) Thickness and information in dynamic matching markets. J. Political Econom. 128(3):783–815.Google Scholar
• Anderson R, Ashlagi I, Gamarnik D, Kanoria Y (2017) Efficient dynamic barter exchange. Oper. Res. 65(6):1446–1459.Link, Google Scholar
• Andradóttir S, Ayhan H, Down DG (2013) Design principles for flexible systems. Production Oper. Management 22(5):1144–1156.Google Scholar
• Arnosti N, Shi P (2018) Design of lotteries and waitlists for affordable housing allocation. Management Science 66(6):2291–2307.Google Scholar
• Arnosti N, Johari, R, Kanoria Y (2022) Managing congestion in matching markets. Manufacturing & Services and Operations Management. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Burq M, Jaillet P, Manshadi V (2018a) On matching and thickness in heterogeneous dynamic markets. Oper. Res. 67(4):927–949.Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Burq M, Dutta C, Jaillet P, Saberi A, Sholley C (2018b) Edge weighted online windowed matching. 19th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, EC 2019, 729–742.Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Azar Y, Charikar M, Chiplunkar A, Geri O, Kaplan H, Makhijani R, Wang Y, Wattenhofer R (2017) Min-cost bipartite perfect matching with delays. Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2017) (Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany), 1–20.Google Scholar
• Ata B, Ding Y, Zenios S (2018) An achievable-region-based approach for kidney allocation policy design with endogenous patient choice. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management 23(1): https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2019.0807.Google Scholar
• Ata B, Skaro A, Tayur S (2017) Organjet: Overcoming geographical disparities in access to deceased donor kidneys in the United States. Management Sci. 63(9):2776–2794.Link, Google Scholar
• Atar R (2005) Scheduling control for queueing systems with many servers: Asymptotic optimality in heavy traffic. Ann. Appl. Probab. 15(4):2606–2650.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baccara M, Lee S, Yariv L (2018) Optimal dynamic matching. Theoretical Economics 15 (2020), 1221–1278.Google Scholar
• Banerjee S, Freund D, Lykouris T (2017) Pricing and optimization in shared vehicle systems: An approximation framework. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, 517–517.Google Scholar
• Banerjee S, Kanoria Y, Qian P (2018) State dependent control of closed queueing networks. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 46(1): 2–4.Google Scholar
• Bassamboo A, Randhawa RS, Van Mieghem JA (2012) A little flexibility is all you need: On the asymptotic value of flexible capacity in parallel queuing systems. Oper. Res. 60(6):1423–1435.Link, Google Scholar
• Bell SL, Williams RJ (2005) Dynamic scheduling of a parallel server system in heavy traffic with complete resource pooling: Asymptotic optimality of a threshold policy. Electron. J. Probab. 10:1044–1115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bertsimas D, Farias VF, Trichakis N (2013) Fairness, efficiency, and flexibility in organ allocation for kidney transplantation. Oper. Res. 61(1):73–87.Link, Google Scholar
• Bloch F, Cantala D (2017) Dynamic assignment of objects to queuing agents. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconomics 9(1):88–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Braverman A, Dai J, Ying L (2019) Empty-car routing in ridesharing systems. Oper. Res. 67(5):1437–1452.Link, Google Scholar
• Budhiraja A, Liu X, Saha S (2016) Construction of asymptotically optimal control for crisscross network from a free boundary problem. Stochastic Systems 6(2):456–518.Link, Google Scholar
• Bušić A, Meyn S (2016) Approximate optimality with bounded regret in dynamic matching models. 2016. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 43(2):75–77.Google Scholar
• Bušić A, Gupta V, Mairesse J (2013) Stability of the bipartite matching model. Adv. Appl. Probab. 45(2):351–378.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caldentey R, Kaplan EH (2002) A heavy traffic approximation for queues with restricted customer-service matchings. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
• Caldentey R, Kaplan EH, Weiss G (2009) FCFS infinite bipartite matching of severs and customers. Adv. Appl. Probab. 41(3):695–730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen X, Zhang J, Zhou Y (2015) Optimal sparse designs for process flexibility via probabilistic expanders. Oper. Res. 63(5):1159–1176.Link, Google Scholar
• Chou MC, Chua GA, Teo C-P, Zheng H (2010) Design for process flexibility: Efficiency of the long chain and sparse structure. Oper. Res. 58(1):43–58.Link, Google Scholar
• Dai JG, Tezcan T (2005) Optimal control of parallel server systems with many servers in heavy traffic. Queueing Systems 59:95–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Désir A, Goyal V, Wei Y, Zhang J (2016) Sparse process flexibility designs: Is the long chain really optimal? Oper. Res. 64(2):416–431.Link, Google Scholar
• Ding Y, McCormick T, Nagarajan M (2018) A fluid model for an overloaded bipartite queueing system with heterogeneous matching utility. SSRN paper No. 2854492, 66 p.Google Scholar
• Fazel-Zarandi MM, Kaplan EH (2018) Approximating the first-come, first-served stochastic matching model with Ohm’s law. Oper. Res. 6:1423–1432.Link, Google Scholar
• Graves SC, Tomlin B (2003) Process flexibility in supply chains. Management Sci. 49(7):907–919.Link, Google Scholar
• Green L (1985) A queueing system with general-use and limited-use servers. Oper. Res. 33(1):168–185.Link, Google Scholar
• Gurumurthi S, Benjaafar S (2004) Modeling and analysis of flexible queueing systems. Naval Res. Logist. 51(5):755–782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gurvich I, Ward A (2014) On the dynamic control of matching queues. Stochastic Systems 4(2):479–523.Link, Google Scholar
• Gurvich I, Whitt W (2009) Scheduling flexible servers with convex delay costs in many-server service systems. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 11(2):237–253.Link, Google Scholar
• Gurvich I, Whitt W (2010) Service-level differentiation in many-server service systems via queue-ratio routing. Oper. Res. 58(2):316–328.Link, Google Scholar
• Harrison JM (1998) Heavy traffic analysis of a system with parallel servers: Asymptotic optimality of discrete review policies. Ann. Appl. Probab. 8(3):822–848.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison JM, Lopez MJ (1999) Heavy traffic resource pooling in parallel-server systems. Queueing Systems 33:339–368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu M, Zhou Y (2018) Dynamic type matching. Rotman School of Management Working Paper No. 2592622, 96 p.Google Scholar
• Iravani S, Kolfal B, Van Oyen M (2011) Capability flexibility: a decision support methodology for parallel service and manufacturing systems with flexible servers. IIE Trans. 43(5):363–382.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jordan WC, Graves SC (1995) Principles on the benefits of manufacturing process flexibility. Management Sci. 41(4):577–594.Link, Google Scholar
• Kalvin A, Varol Y (1983) On the generation of all topological sortings. J. Algorithms 4:150–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan EH (1984) Managing demand for public housing. Report, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Kaplan EH (1988) A public housing queue with reneging and task-specific servers. Decision Sci. 19:383–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karp RM, Vazirani UV, Vazirani VV (1990) An optimal algorithm for on-line bipartite matching. Ortiz H, ed. Proc. 22nd Annual ACM Sympos. Theory of Computing (STOC) (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY), 352–358.Google Scholar
• Laws CN (1992) Resource pooling in queueing networks with dynamic routing. Adv. Appl. Probab. 24:699–726.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leshno JD (2017) Dynamic matching in overloaded waiting lists. SSRN paper No. 2967011.Google Scholar
• Ma W, Simchi-Levi D (2018) Online resource allocation under arbitrary arrivals: Optimal algorithms and tight competitive ratios. Oper. Res. 68(6): https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2019.1957.Google Scholar
• Mairesse J, Moyal P (2017) Stability of the stochastic matching model. J. Appl. Probab. 53:1064–1077.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mandelbaum A, Stolyar S (2004) Scheduling flexible servers with convex delay costs: Heavy-traffic optimality of the generalized cμ rule. Oper. Res. 52(6):836–855.Link, Google Scholar
• Mehta A (2012) Online matching and ad allocation. Foundations Trends Theoret. Comput. Sci. 8(4):265–368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moyal P, Perry O (2017) On the instability of matching queues. Ann. Appl. Probab. 27(6):3385–3434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nazari M, Stolyar AL (2016) Optimal control of general dynamic matching systems. Queueing Systems, 2019, 91:143–170.Google Scholar
• Ozkan E, Ward A (2020) Dynamic matching for real-time ridesharing. Stochastic Systems 10(1):29–70.Google Scholar
• Rogerson R, Shimer R, Wright R (2005) Search-theoretic models of the labor market: A survey. J. Econom. Lit. 43(4):959–988.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwartz BL (1974) Queueing models with lane selection: A new class of problems. Oper. Res. 22(2):331–339.Link, Google Scholar
• Shi C, Wei Y, Zhong Y (2019) Process flexibility for multi-period production systems. Oper. Res. 67(5):1300–1320.Link, Google Scholar
• Su X, Zenios S (2004) Patient choice in kidney allocation: The role of the queueing discipline. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 6(4):280–301.Link, Google Scholar
• Su X, Zenios S (2006) Recipient choice can address the efficiency-equity trade-off in kidney transplantation: A mechanism design model. Management Sci. 52(11):1647–1660.Link, Google Scholar
• Talreja R, Whitt W (2008) Fluid models for overloaded multi-class many-service queueing systems with fcfs routing. Management Sci. 54(1):1513–1527.Link, Google Scholar
• Tsitsiklis JN, Xu K (2012) On the power of (even a little) resource pooling. Stochastic Systems 2(1):1–66.Link, Google Scholar
• Tsitsiklis JN, Xu K (2017) Flexible queueing architectures. Oper. Res. 65(5):1398–1413.Link, Google Scholar
• Unver MU (2010) Dynamic kidney exchange. Rev. Econom. Stud. 77(1):372–414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wallace RB, Whitt W (2005) A staffing algorithm for call centers with skill-based routing. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 7(4):276–294.Link, Google Scholar
• Ward AR, Armony M (2013) Blind fair routing in large-scale service systems with heterogeneous customers and servers. Oper. Res. 61(1):228–243.Link, Google Scholar
• Zenios SA, Chertow GM, Wein LM (2000), Dynamic allocation of kidneys to candidates on the transplant waiting list. Oper. Res. 48(4):549–569.Google Scholar