arxiv: v1 [q-fin.ec] 14 Jul 2015

Transcription

1 he nonlinear Bernstein-Schrödinger equation in Economics Alfred Galichon Scott Duke Kominers Simon Weber arxiv: v1 [q-fin.ec] 14 Jul 2015 July 17, 2018 In this note, we will review and extend some results from our previous work [8] where we introduced a novel approach to imperfectly transferable utility and unobserved heterogeneity in tastes, based on a nonlinear generalization of the Bernstein-Schrödinger equation. We consider an assignment problem where agents from two distinct populations may form pairs, which generates utility to each agent. Utility may be transfered across partners, possibly with frictions. his general framework hence encompasses both the classic Non-ranferable Utility model NU) of Gale and Shapley [6], sometimes called the stable marriage problem, where there exists no technology to allow transfers between matched partners; and the ransferable Utility U) model of Becker [1] and Shapley-Shubik [14], a.k.a. optimal assignment problem, where utility money) is additively transferable across partners. If the NU assumption seems natural for many markets including school choices), U models are more appropriate in most settings where there can be bargaining labour and marriage markets for example). However, even in those markets, there can be transfer frictions. For example, in marriage markets, the transfers between partners might take the form of favor exchange rather than cash), and the cost of a favor to one partner may not exactly equal the benefit to the other. In [8], we thus developped a general Imperfectly ransferable Utility model with unobserved heterogeneity, which includes as special cases the classic fully- and non-transferable utility models, but also extends to collective models, and settings with taxes on transfers, deadweight losses, and risk aversion. As we argue in the present note, the models we consider in [8] obey a particularly simple system of equations we dubbed Nonlinear Bernstein-Schrödinger equation. he present contribution present a general result for the latter equation, and also derives several consequences. he main result is derived in Section 1. Section 2 and Section 3 consider equilibrium assignment problems with and without heterogeneity. Finally, we provide a discussion of our results in Section 4. Economics Department, Sciences Po, Paris, and New York University. alfred.galichon@sciencespo.fr. Galichon gratefully acknowledges funding from the European Research Council under the European Union s Seventh Framework Programme FP7/ ) / ERC grant agreements no and , and FiME. Society of Fellows, Harvard University. kominers@fas.harvard.edu. Kominers gratefully acknowledges the support of NSF grant CCF and the Harvard Milton Fund. Economics Department, Sciences Po, Paris. Address: Sciences Po, Department of Economics, 27 rue Saint- Guillaume, Paris, France. simon.weber@sciencespo.fr. 1

2 1 he main result For x X and y Y, we consider a function M xy : R 2 R, and M x0 : R R and M 0y : R R. Let n x ) x X and m y ) y Y be vectors of positive numbers. Consider the nonlinear Bernstein- Schrödinger system, which consists in looking for two vectors u R X and v R Y such that { Mx0 u x )+ y Y M xyu x,v y ) = n x M 0y v y )+ x X M xyu x,v y ) = m y. heorem 1. Assume M xy satisfies the following three conditions: i) Continuity. he maps M xy : u x,v y ) M xy u x,v y ), M x0 : u x ) M x0 u x ) and M 0y : v y ) M 0y v y ) are continuous ii) Monotonicity. he map M xy : u x,v y ) M xy u x,v y ) is monotonically decreasing, i.e if u x u x and u y u y, then M xy u x,v y ) Mu x,v y). he maps M x0 : u x ) M x0 u x ) and M 0y : v y ) M 0y v y ) are monotonically decreasing. iii) Limits. For each v y,lim ux M xy u x,v y ) = 0 and lim ux M xy u x,v y ) = +, and for each u x, lim uy M xy u x,v y ) = 0and lim uy M xy u x,v y ) = +. Additionally, lim ux M x0 u x ) = 0 and lim uy M 0y u y ) = 0, and lim ux M x0 u x ) = + and lim uy M 0y u y ) = +. hen there exists a solution to the nonlinear Bernstein-Schrödinger system. Further, if the maps M are C 1, the solution is unique. his theorem appears in [8] under a slightly different form. he proof is interesting as it provides an algorithm of determination of u and v. It is an important generalization of the Iterated Projection Fitting Proceduresee [5], [12], and [13]), which has been rediscovered and utilized many times under different names for various applied purposes: RAS algorithm [10], biproportional fitting, Sinkhorn Scaling [4], etc. However, all these techniques and their variants can be recast as particular cases of the method described in the proof of heorem 1. For convenience, we recall the algorithm used to provide a constructive proof of existence. Algorithm 1. Step 0 Fix the initial value of v y at vy 0 = +. Step 2t+1 Keep the values vy 2t fixed. For each x X, solve for the value, u 2t+1 x such that equality y Y M xyu x,vy 2t )+M x0 u x ) = n x holds. Step 2t+2 Keep the values u 2t+1 x fixed. For each y Y, solve for which is the value, vy 2t+2 such that equality x X M xyu 2t+1 x,v y )+M 0y v y ) = m y holds. u t and v t converge monotonically to a solution of the Bernstein-Schrödinger system. hen In practice a precision level ǫ > 0 will be chosen, and the algorithm will terminate when sup y vy 2t+2 vy 2t < ǫ. Proof. i) Existence. he proof of existence is an application of arski s fixed point theorem and relies on the previous Algorithm. We need to prove that the construction of u 2t+1 x and vy 2t+2 at each step is well defined. Consider step 2t+1. For each x X, the equation to solve is M xy u x,v y )+M x0 u x ) = n x y Y but the right handside is a continuous and decreasing function of u x, tends to 0 when u x + and tends to + when u x. Note that by letting v y +, the terms in the sum tends 2

3 to 0, providing a lower bound for u x. Hence u 2t+1 x and let us denote u 2t+1 x is well defined and belongs in M 1 x0 n x),+ ), = F x v 2t. ) and clearly, F is anti-isotone, meaning that vy 2t ṽ2t y for all y Y implies F xṽ. 2t ) F x v. 2t ) for ) all x X. By the same token, at step 2t+2, vy 2t+2 is well defined in M0y 1 m y),+, and let us denote vy 2t+2 = G y u 2t+1. ) where, similarly, G is anti-isotone. hus v. 2t+2 = G F v. 2t ) where G F is isotone. But vy 2 < = vy 0 implies that v. 2t+2 G F v. 2t ) ). Hence v 2t+2. t N is a decreasing sequence, bounded from below by 0. As a result v. 2t+2 converges. Letting v. its limit, and letting ū = F v), one can see that ū, v) is a solution to the nonlinear Bernstein-Schrödinger system. ii) Unicity. Introduce map ζ defined by ζx = y Y ζ : u x,v y ) M ) xyu x,v y )+M x0 u x ) ζ y = x X M xyu x,v y )+M 0y v y ) One has where: Dζu x,v y ) = A B C D ) A = ζ x / u x ) xx = y Y u x M xy B = ζ x / v y ) xy = vy M xy u x,v y ) ) ux,v y +1 if x = x, 0 otherwise. C = ζ y / u x ) yx = ux M xy u x,v y ) D = ) ζ y / v y = yy x X v y M x yu x v y )+1 if y = y, 0 otherwise. It is straightforward to show that the matrix Dζ is dominant diagonal. A result from [11] states that a dominant diagonal matrix with positive diagonal entries is a P-matrix. Hence Dζu x,v y ) is a P-matrix. Applying heorem 4 in [9] it follows that ζ is injective. 2 Equilibrium Assignment Problem In this section, we consider the equilibrium assignment problem, which is a far-reaching generalization of the optimal assignment problem. o describe this framework, consider two finite populations I and J, and a two-sided matching framework for simplicity, we will call men and women the two sides of this market) with imperfect transfers and without heterogeneity. Agents i I and j J get respectively utility u i and v j they get at equiliburium. If i or j remains unmatched, they get utility 0; however, if they match together, they may get any respective utilities u i and v j such that the feasibility constraint is imposed Ψ ij u i,v j ) 0, 1) where the transfer function Ψ ij is assumed to be continuous and isotone with respect to its arguments. Note that at equilibrium, u i 0 and v j 0 as the agents always have the option to 3

4 remain unassigned; by the same token, if for any pair i, j matched or not), one cannot have a strict inequality in 1), otherwise i and j would have an incentive to form a blocking pair, and achieve a higher payoff than their equilibrium payoff. hus the stability condition Ψ ij u i,v j ) 0, holds in general. Let µ ij = 1 if i and j are matched, and 0 otherwise; we have therefore that µ ij > 0 implies that Ψ ij u i,v j ) = 0. his allows us to define an equilibrium outcome. Definition 1. he equilibrium assignment problem defined by Ψ has an equilibrium outcome µ ij,u i,v j ) whenever the following conditions are met: i) µ ij 0, u i 0 and v j 0 ii) j µ ij 1 and i µ ij 1 iii) Ψ ij u i,v j ) 0 iv) µ ij > 0 implies Ψ ij u i,v j ) = 0. Note that, by the Birkhoff-von Neumann theorem, the existence of an equilibrium in this problem leads to the existence of an equilibrium satisfying the stronger integrality requirement µ ij {0,1}. his general framework allow us to express the optimal assignment problem matching with ransferable Utility), as the case where while in the NU case Ψ ij u i,v j ) = u i +v j Φ ij, Ψ ij u i,v j ) = maxu i α ij,v j γ ij ). Other interesting cases are considered in [8]. For instance, the Linearly ransferable Utility LU) model, where Ψ ij u i,v j ) = λ ij u i α ij )+ζ ij v j γ ij ) with λ ij,ζ ij > 0, and the Exponentially ransferable Utility EU) model, in which Ψ ij takes the form ) expui /τ)+expv j /τ) Ψ ij u i,v j ) = τ log. 2 In the EU model, the parameter τ ij is defined as the degree of transferability, since τ + recovers the U case and τ 0 recovers the NU framework. heorem 2. Assume Ψ is such that: a) For any x X and y Y, we have Ψ xy, ) continuous. b) For any x X, y Y, t t and r r, we have Ψ xy t,r) Ψ xy t,r ); furthermore, when t < t and r < r, we have Ψ xy t,r) < Ψ xy t,r ). c) For any sequence t n,r n ), if r n ) is bounded and t n +, then liminfψ xy t n,r n ) > 0. Analogously, if t n ) is bounded and r n +, then liminfψ xy t n,r n ) > 0. d) For any sequence t n,r n ) such that if t n r n ) is bounded and t n or equivalently, r n + ), we have that limsupψ xy t n,r n ) < 0. hen the equilibrium assignment problem defined by Ψ ij has an equilibrium outcome. Proof. Consider > 0 and let M ij u i,v j ) = exp Ψ ) iju i,v j ) M i0 u i ) = exp u ) i M 0j v j ) = exp v ) j and consider the Bernstein-Schrödinger system { Mi0 u i )+ j J M iju i,v j ) = 1 M 0j v j )+ i I M ij u i,v j ) = 1. 4

5 We need to show that M xy.,.), M x0.) and M 0y.) satisfy the properties stated in heorem 1. It is straightforward to show that conditions i) and ii) in heorem 1 follow directly from assumptions a) and b) on Ψ. Moreover, letting 0 +, assumptions c) and d) together imply that condition iii) is satisfied. Hence we can apply heorem 1, and it follows that a solution u i,v j to the system ) ) exists. Note that M i0 u i 1 and M0j vj 1 imply that u i 0 and vj 0. Now, consider the sequence obtained by taking = k, k N. hen, up to a subsequence extraction, ) we may assume u k i ū i R + {+ } and vj k v j R + {+ }. It follows that Ψ ij u k i,vk j converges ) in R + {+ }, hence µ k ij = M ij u k i,vk j converges toward µ ij [0,1]. Similarly, the limits µ i0 and µ 0j exist in [0,1]. Hence i) in Definition 1 is met. By continuity, µ satisfies { µi0 + j J µ ij = 1 µ 0j + i I µ ij = 1, which established ii). Let us show that iii) holds, that is, that Ψ ij u i,v j ) 0 for ) any i and j. Assume otherwise. hen there exists ǫ > 0 such that for k large enough, Ψ ij u k i,vk j < ǫ, so that µ k ij > expǫ/) +, contradicting µ ij 1. hus, we have established iii). Finally, we show that iv) holds. Assume otherwise. hen there is i and j such that µ ij > 0 and Ψ ij ū i, v j ) > ) 0. his implies that there exists ǫ > 0 such that for k large enough, µ k ij > ǫ, thus Ψ ij u k i,vk j < logǫ 0, hence Ψ ij ū i, v j ) 0, a contradiction. Hence iv) holds; this completes the proof and establishes that µ, ū, v) is an equilibrium assignment. 3 IU matching with heterogeneity Following [8], we now assume that individuals may be gathered into groups of agents of similar observable characteristics, or types, but heterogeneous tastes. We let X and Y be the sets of types of men and women. An individual man i I has type x i X; similarly, an individual woman j J has type y j Y. We assume that there is a mass n x of men of type x and m y of women of type y, respectively. Assume further that Ψ ij u i,v j ) = Ψ xi y j u i ε iy,v j η xj ), where ǫ and η are i.i.d. random vectors drawn from a Gumbel distribution, and where > 0 is a temperature parameter. Unassigned agents get ε i0 and η 0j. For all i such that x i = x and y j = y, the stability condition implies Hence, hus, letting min i:x i =x j:y j =y we have Ψ xy U xy,v xy ) 0, and with Ψ xi y j u i ε iy,v j η xj ) 0. Ψ xi y j u i ε iy,v j η xj ) 0. U xy = min i:x i =x {u i ε iy } and V xy = min j:y j =y {v j η xj }, µ xy = i:x i =x j:y j =y 5 µ ij

6 we have that µ xy > 0 implies Ψ xy U xy,v xy ) = 0, and by a standard argument the random vectors ǫ and η are drawn from distributions with full support, hence there will be at least a man i of type x and a woman j of type y such that i prefers type y and j prefers type x, that is, µ xy > 0 for all x and y) Ψ xy U xy,v xy ) = 0 x X,y Y. Note that this is an extension to the IU case of the analysis in Galichon and Salanié [7], building on Choo and Siow [3]. We have that u i = max y {U xy +ε iy,ε i0 } and v j = max{v xy +η xj,η 0j }, x thus a standard result from Extreme Value heory see Choo and Siow [3] for a derivation) yields so we see that µ xy satisfies U xy = log µ xy µ x0 and V xy = log µ xy µ 0y, µ x0 + y Y µ xy = n x µ 0y + x X µ xy = m ) y Ψ xy log µxy µ x0, log µxy µ 0y = 0. 2) he various cases of interest discussed above, namely U, NU, LU, and EU cases yield, respectively, µ xy = µ 1/2 x0 µ1/2 0y exp Φ xy 2 U) µ xy = minµ x0 e αxy,µ 0y e γxy ) NU) µ xy = e λxyαxy+ζxyγxy)/λxy+ζxy) µ λxy/λxy+ζxy) x0 e α xy/τ xy µ 1/τxy x0 µ xy = +e γxy/τxy µ 1/τxy 0y 2 µ ζxy/λxy+ζxy) 0y ) τxy EU), LU) see [3]). o apply heorem 1, we let M xy u x,v y ) be the value m solution to for a proof of existence and uniqueness of such a solution, see Lemma 1 of [8]) and let Ψ xy logm+u x, logm+v y ) = 0, ) ) ux vy M x0 u x ) = exp and M 0y v y ) = exp. In [8], we rewrote system 2) as a nonlinear Bernstein-Schrödinger system, namely { Mx0 u x )+ y Y M xyu x,v y ) = n x M 0y v y )+ x X M xyu x,v y ) = m y. heorem 3. he nonlinear Bernstein-Schrödinger system in 2) has a unique solution Proof. he proof follows directly from the application of heorem 1. It is easy to check that the conditions on M x0.) and M 0y.) required by heorem 1 are met in this case. Lemma 1 in [8] provides a proof that M xy satisfies these conditions. 6

7 4 Discussion In this note, we have argued how matching problems may be formulated as a system of nonlinear equations, also known as the Bernstein-Schrödinger equation or Schrödinger s problem [15]. We have shown existence and uniqueness of a solution under certain conditions, and have explicited the link with various matching problems, with or without heterogeneity. Solving such a system of equations requires an algorithm that we call the Iterative Projection Fitting Procedure IPFP); in practice, this algorithm converges very quickly. Our setting can be extended in several ways. One of them is to consider the case with unassigned agents. In that case, we have the additional constraint that x n x = y m y, thus the nonlinear Bernstein-Schrödinger system, which in this case writes as { y Y M xyu x,v y ) = n x x X M xyu x,v y ) = m y has a degree of freedom, as the sum over x X of the first set of equations coincides with the sum over y Y of the second one. he one-dimensional manifold of solutions of this problem is studied in [2]. References [1] Becker, G. S. 1973): A heory of Marriage: Part I, Journal of Political Economy, 814), pp [2] Carlier, G., and Galichon, A. 2014): A remark on the manifold of solutions of a nonlinear Schrödinger system, Working Paper. [3] Choo, E., and A. Siow 2006): Who Marries Whom and Why, Journal of Political Economy, 1141), pp [4] Cuturi, M. 2013): Sinkhorn Distances: Lightspeed Computation of Optimal ransport. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp [5] Deming, W. E., and Stephan, F. F. 1940): On a Least Squares Adjustment of a Sampled Frequency able When the Expected Marginal otals are Known, Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 114), pp [6] Gale, D., & Shapley, L. S. 1962): College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage, American Mathematical Monthly, 691), pp [7] Galichon, A., and B. Salanié2014): Cupid s Invisible Hand: Social Surplus and Identification in Matching Models, Working paper. [8] Galichon, A., S. D. Kominers, and S. Weber 2014): An Empirical Framework for Matching with Imperfectly ransferable Utility, Working paper. [9] Gale, D., and Nikaido, H. 1965): he Jacobian matrix and global univalence of mappings, Mathematische Annalen, 1592), pp [10] Kruithof, J. 1937): elefoonverkeersrekening, De Ingenieur, 52, E15 E25. [11] McKenzie, L. W. 1959): Matrices with dominant diagonals and economic theory. Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences Stanford Univ. Press

8 [12] Ruschendorf, L.1995): Convergence of the Iterative Proportional Fitting Procedure, Annals of Statistics, 234), pp [13] Rüschendorf, L., and homsen, W. 1998): Closedness of Sum Spaces andthe Generalized Schrödinger Problem, heory of Probability & Its Applications, 423), pp [14] Shapley, L., and M. Shubik 1972): he Assignment Game I: he Core, International Journal of Game heory, 1, pp [15] Schrödinger, E. 1931): Über die Umkehrung der Naturgesetze. Sitzungsberichte Preuss, Akad. Wiss. Berlin, Phys. Math., 144, pp