[Share]The algorithm of love, matches
算我半個老闆的Peggy老師寄了封特別的信，
通常是滿滿的工作內容塞滿信件，但這次卻很特別。
“The algorithm of love, matches” (愛的配對算法)
老師是將此報章掃描下，而我在網路上也有搜尋到
是篇華盛頓郵報專欄，現在跟大家摘錄分享一下~
Great matches have inspired philosophy and verse for as long as we have possessed charcoal to scratch with. ...How do they sort through all the potential mates and find their true loves?
If God spent a minute evaluating each match before assigning people their spouses, the procedure would take 21.4 trillion years to complete. By then, the chocolates would be stale.
So how does it work?
Economists have made a science of studying the mechanisms humans have developed over time to achieve good matches. The pioneering work was published in 1962 by David Gale and Lloyd Shapley and was titled “College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage.”
The algorithm, which was a purely theoretical construct, is simple and eerily reminiscent of historical social convention. Suppose that we put 10 men and 10 women, all heterosexual, in a room. The Gale-Shapley algorithm would assign their mates as follows: The men line up and, one by one, propose to their favorite woman. The women can either reject the proposal or defer it until the next round by becoming “engaged.” In the next round, each unengaged fellow tries again with his next favorite woman. A woman who was previously engaged can ditch her fiance and become engaged to her new suitor if she wishes. The game continues until everyone is engaged, at which point, in cult-like fashion, everyone is married all at once.
The beauty of the approach is that it distributes people into stable matches. But there is a dark side to it as well. A matching game that proceeds with men signaling their interest and women choosing from among their suitors seems as though it gives women the power. But in fact, it does the reverse. Since each man proposes to the women starting with his most favorite and continuing through lesser choices, he is eventually matched with the woman who is his most favorite among the set of all women who would have him. The opposite is true for the women, whose most favorite men may not ever even propose to them.
(耀弟，麻煩請你跟我解釋一下此結果喔~推眼鏡XD)
結局請直接點入原始完整文章:
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/washington-post/2009/02/11/195559/p1/The-algorithm.htm
最後的結論其實還蠻有趣的~
不過由於今天我的工作已經忙翻譯一整天，
所以請大家好好接受全球化語言之來臨 :P
噢~我的真命天子，請將你那朵唯一的花兒遞給我吧 :)
通常是滿滿的工作內容塞滿信件，但這次卻很特別。
“The algorithm of love, matches” (愛的配對算法)
老師是將此報章掃描下，而我在網路上也有搜尋到
是篇華盛頓郵報專欄，現在跟大家摘錄分享一下~
Great matches have inspired philosophy and verse for as long as we have possessed charcoal to scratch with. ...How do they sort through all the potential mates and find their true loves?
If God spent a minute evaluating each match before assigning people their spouses, the procedure would take 21.4 trillion years to complete. By then, the chocolates would be stale.
So how does it work?
Economists have made a science of studying the mechanisms humans have developed over time to achieve good matches. The pioneering work was published in 1962 by David Gale and Lloyd Shapley and was titled “College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage.”
The algorithm, which was a purely theoretical construct, is simple and eerily reminiscent of historical social convention. Suppose that we put 10 men and 10 women, all heterosexual, in a room. The Gale-Shapley algorithm would assign their mates as follows: The men line up and, one by one, propose to their favorite woman. The women can either reject the proposal or defer it until the next round by becoming “engaged.” In the next round, each unengaged fellow tries again with his next favorite woman. A woman who was previously engaged can ditch her fiance and become engaged to her new suitor if she wishes. The game continues until everyone is engaged, at which point, in cult-like fashion, everyone is married all at once.
The beauty of the approach is that it distributes people into stable matches. But there is a dark side to it as well. A matching game that proceeds with men signaling their interest and women choosing from among their suitors seems as though it gives women the power. But in fact, it does the reverse. Since each man proposes to the women starting with his most favorite and continuing through lesser choices, he is eventually matched with the woman who is his most favorite among the set of all women who would have him. The opposite is true for the women, whose most favorite men may not ever even propose to them.
(耀弟，麻煩請你跟我解釋一下此結果喔~推眼鏡XD)
結局請直接點入原始完整文章:
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/washington-post/2009/02/11/195559/p1/The-algorithm.htm
最後的結論其實還蠻有趣的~
不過由於今天我的工作已經忙翻譯一整天，
所以請大家好好接受全球化語言之來臨 :P
噢~我的真命天子，請將你那朵唯一的花兒遞給我吧 :)
Comments