Short of A Matching

Posted by on Oct 31, 2011 in Uncategorized | No Comments

A Defective Matching

In this discussion, a matching M in a relation R is simply a subset of R where all pairs are distinct – thus for (a,b) \in M and (c,d) \in M, a \neq b and b \neq d. A perfect matching in R has |A| pairs. To avoid appearing repetitive, we will assume that any mention of a matching refers to M \subseteq R, where R \subseteq A \times B is a relation from A to B. When a matching is so special as to be perfect, we will be explicit about it (and thus a matching is not to be considered perfect by default). The Marriage Theorem states R admits a perfect matching if, and only if,

 \forall X \subseteq A, |R(X)| \geq X.

We will presently resist the temptation to describe any of the many proofs of this theorem, and proceed assuming the truth of the statement. Since the theorem gives us a characterization for relations that admit perfect matchings, it is natural to consider those that don’t. So, what is it about a perfect matching that makes it neat?

Let’s say a matching saturates an element a \in A if (a,x) \in M for some x \in B. A perfect matching clearly saturates all elements of A. As a first step towards looking at non-perfect matchings, let us try those that saturate not all, but simply “at least a certain number” of the elements in A. In particular, let’s say that a matching M has deficit d if it saturates all but d elements in A.

Leave a Reply