Tiered matching model considering quality compatibility in two-sided markets
Expert Systems with Applications, ISSN: 0957-4174, Vol: 265, Page: 125835
2025
- 1Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures1
- Readers1
Article Description
This paper explores how platforms can effectively match heterogeneous users within tiers to increase matches and profits in two-sided matching markets. With the rapid expansion of digital platforms, user preferences and quality have become increasingly differentiated, leading to market congestion, search frictions, and inequality among users of different levels. To address these issues, we propose a centralized matching model that dynamically estimates user popularity and adjusts acceptable match sets. The model incorporates a reciprocal recommender to reduce inequality in matching and avoid congestion from users intensively sending requests to higher-tier counterparts. By analyzing user recommendation lists, the model quantifies the impact of market thickness, congestion, and matching security on participant utility. We then establish integer linear programming models to solve the stable matching optimization problem, maximizing platform revenue and social welfare. Numerical experiments validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach, demonstrating that a soft-tiered strategy using a reciprocal recommender optimizes the distribution of matching pairs across different levels, significantly increasing matches for middle and lower-tier users while enhancing platform revenue and social welfare. The model provides decision support for platforms to optimize tiered strategies and assists regulatory agencies in monitoring potential social welfare losses from excessive segmentation. The findings highlight the importance of considering user heterogeneity and market characteristics in designing effective matching mechanisms for two-sided platforms.
Bibliographic Details
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know