Perfect Proportional Allocation

• Perfect Proportional Allocation is a method ensuring each agent’s share is mathematically proportional to specified criteria, crucial for fairness in resource distribution.
• It employs advanced optimization techniques, including graph-theoretic approaches and matrix scaling, to meet complex divisibility and capacity constraints efficiently.
• Empirical applications in stratified sampling, load balancing, and participatory budgeting demonstrate its practicality, computational tractability, and scalability.

Perfect Proportional Allocation refers to the precise assignment of resources, goods, samples, or entitlements such that each participant’s share is mathematically proportional to a specified rule—often population, declared demand, bid, or weight—while respecting global constraints. In contemporary research, the concept is instantiated across diverse domains: statistical stratified sampling, mechanism design, divisible and indivisible goods, resource scheduling, blockchain reward sharing, and combinatorial allocation in networks and graphs. The following sections detail the foundational principles, methodologies, and exemplary results underlying perfect proportional allocation, with rigorous attention to formalism, optimality, and computational tractability.

1. Key Mathematical Foundations and Definitions

Perfect proportional allocation requires that for each agent $i$, resource $j$, or population subdomain $h$, the allocation $x_{ij}$ (or, in aggregate, $x_i$) satisfies

$x_i = P_i \cdot R,$

where $P_i$ is the agent's prescribed share (proportional to population, declared demand, entitlement, etc.), and $R$ is the total available quantity. Additional constraints often apply:

• Divisibility or indivisibility of resources.
• Capacity constraints (e.g., link capacity in networks, maximum load per resource).
• Fairness relaxations: In settings with indivisibilities (goods or chores), perfect proportionality is generally unattainable; variants such as proportional up to one item (PROP1), up to the maximin good (PROPm), or up to the average least-valued good (PROPavg) appear (Baklanov et al., 2021, Kobayashi et al., 2022).

A precise combinatorial characterization is given in bipartite assignment models, where an allocation is perfect proportional if each item (left-side node) is assigned fractionally to its neighbors (right-side nodes) in proportion to assigned weights—subject to aggregate feasibility (Hathcock et al., 1 Oct 2025).

2. Graph-Theoretic and Optimization Approaches

A central methodology converts proportional allocation into a structured optimization—often graph-based or matrix-based:

• Stratification in sampling: The problem of optimally partitioning a population under proportional allocation to minimize variance is recast as finding a minimum-cost path in a directed acyclic graph. Each arc corresponds to forming a stratum; its cost encodes the variance contribution for the stratum under proportional sample allocation (see formula (1)):

$$V(\widehat{Y}) = \frac{N}{n} \left(1 - \frac{n}{N}\right) \sum_{h=1}^L N_h S_{y,h}^2,$$

with $N_h$, $S_{y,h}^2$ functions of the stratum's boundaries. The optimal allocation is obtained by solving a shortest-path problem with the constraint that the path contains exactly $L$ arcs, reflecting $L$ strata (0902.3223).

• Matrix scaling for bipartite graphs: Given a bipartite graph $G = (I \cup J, E)$ with supply vector $S$ for left nodes and capacity vector $C$ for right nodes, a proportional allocation exists if one can scale the incidence matrix $A$ using positive vectors $x$, $y$ such that $\widetilde{A}_{ij} = A_{ij} x_i y_j$ and sums to $S$ and $C$. A perfect proportional allocation (i.e., resulting in a fractional perfect matching) exists if and only if the graph is matching-covered (Hathcock et al., 1 Oct 2025).
• Mechanism design with projection: Strategic agents declare demands $y_i$; the allocation is $x_i = r y_i$ for a scaling factor $$r = \min_l \{ \text{capacity}_l / \sum_{j \in N^l} \alpha_j^l y_j \}$$. Combined with suitable taxes, this realizes the centralized welfare maximizer as a unique Nash equilibrium (Sinha et al., 2014).

3. Existence and Characterization—Structural and Algorithmic Results

The existence of perfect proportional allocations depends on domain structure and proportionality's precise interpretation:

• Divisible resources: With no indivisibility, perfect proportionality is always achievable given unconstrained resource pools (e.g., splitting bandwidth, dividing load). Kelly’s mechanism and similar proportional allocation rules are uniquely efficient and implementable (Christodoulou et al., 2015).
• Bipartite matchings: A graph admits a perfect proportional allocation if and only if it is matching-covered (i.e., every edge is in some perfect matching), a condition characterized by a strengthened Hall’s theorem. This allows matrix scaling arguments to be used to both prove existence and construct allocations (Hathcock et al., 1 Oct 2025).
• Indivisible goods/chores: Full proportionality is generally unattainable. Approximate variants such as PROPm (prop up to maximin good), PROPavg (up to average least good), and PROP1 (up to one removal/addition) have been shown to always exist, with constructive polynomial-time algorithms (Baklanov et al., 2021, Kobayashi et al., 2022, V. et al., 2023). These can be further refined to settings with asymmetric (weighted) entitlements and ordinal-only valuations.
• Sampling theory: For stratification under proportional (sample) allocation, the proposed graph-based algorithm guarantees existence of an optimal stratification under the constraints that each stratum contains at least two units, with solution complexity scaling polynomially in dataset size (0902.3223).

4. Computational Considerations and Efficiency

Efficient computation is a haLLMark of recent advances:

• Shortest-path algorithms: The stratification algorithm applies an extension of Dijkstra’s method constrained to paths of exact length (number of strata), yielding CPU times of order seconds even with hundreds of possible strata boundaries (0902.3223).
• Matching and assignment polytopes: For tasks such as fair indivisible allocation with weighted entitlements and ordinal preferences, feasible allocations correspond to perfect matchings in an allocation graph. The matching polytope is integral; optimization over this polytope (e.g., for min-cost or sequencible allocations) is tractable via network flow/matching algorithms (V. et al., 2023).
• Recursive and decomposition approaches: For PROPm and similar fairness relaxations, algorithms use recursive decomposition of instance/bundle/agent pairs, graph reachability, and directed update graphs. These guarantee polynomial time in the number of agents and items (Baklanov et al., 2021).
• Matrix scaling: The central scaling problem for perfect proportional allocation in bipartite graphs reduces to classical matrix scaling, whose convergence and tractability are well-studied; constructive proofs yield explicit weights for allocation (Hathcock et al., 1 Oct 2025).

5. Empirical Performance and Practical Applications

Empirical studies underpin the practical utility:

• Population stratification in surveys: When applied to large demographic datasets (e.g., Brazilian crop survey with $N=488$, $|I|=197$), the minimal-path algorithm produces stratifications with low coefficients of variation ($\text{CV}=3.3\%$–$3.7\%$), outperforming standard stratification heuristics and converging quickly (0902.3223).
• Load balancing and task allocation: In online ad assignment and scheduling, proportional allocations (or their relaxations) offer provable throughput and fairness guarantees, often corresponding to maximizing social welfare under system constraints (Hathcock et al., 1 Oct 2025, Sinha et al., 2014).
• Participatory budgeting: Polynomial-time proportional sharing mechanisms (e.g., variants of “Method of Equal Shares”) produce outcomes with empirically higher social welfare and better voter satisfaction, even when voter preferences over substitute projects are considered (Fairstein et al., 2021).
• Robustness: Trade-offs between accuracy (in estimation, as in blockchain reward splitting protocols) and communication or storage overhead are made explicit by probabilistic analysis, enabling protocol designers to match parameter choices to system constraints (Aumayr et al., 13 Mar 2025).

6. Extensions, Limitations, and Theoretical Implications

Several limitations and generalizations are worth noting:

• Necessity of structural properties: For proportional allocation in bipartite graphs, the matching-covered property is both necessary and sufficient; non-matching-covered graphs require more sophisticated, often hierarchical, allocation schemes built from components (Dulmage–Mendelsohn decomposition) (Hathcock et al., 1 Oct 2025).
• Divisibility assumption: Full proportionality in the strictest sense is unattainable for indivisible resources without monetary compensation or approximate fairness relaxations; this is unavoidable and widely acknowledged in the literature (Baklanov et al., 2021, Kobayashi et al., 2022).
• Multiple constraints: When allocations are subject to multiple orthogonal constraints (e.g., weight and volume), naïve proportional schemes can violate some constraints arbitrarily; advanced algorithms must account for all active constraints, often at greater computational cost (Hathcock et al., 1 Oct 2025).
• Strategic environments: In mechanisms with self-interested agents and incomplete information, proportional mechanisms retain equilibria (full implementation), but worst-case efficiency losses (Price of Anarchy up to $2$) may occur if agents’ valuation classes are general (subadditive) (Sinha et al., 2014, Christodoulou et al., 2015). No scale-free “simple” mechanism can outperform this bound.
• Sampling and estimation error: In approximate proportional protocols that rely on empirical measurement (e.g., blockchains with workshares), there is a trade-off between the estimation error (controlled by number of samples, see formula $n = -2 \log \epsilon / (\delta^2 p)$) and data overhead (Aumayr et al., 13 Mar 2025).

7. Representative Formalisms

The following table summarizes key mathematical structures used across domains:

Domain	Allocation Formula	Existence Condition
Stratified sampling	$V(\widehat{Y}) = (N/n)(1-n/N)\sum N_h S_{y,h}^2$	Always, for $n> L$ and proper $L$
Bipartite assignment	$$x_{ij} = S_i \cdot (\alpha_j/\sum_{a\sim i}\alpha_a)$$	Matching-covered graphs
Divisible resources	$x_{ij} = b_{ij}/\sum_k b_{kj}$	Always; efficiency via PoA bounds
Indivisible goods/chores	$v_i(X_i) + g \geq 1/n$ (PROPm)	Always for PROPm/PROPavg/PROP1
Mechanism design	$x_i = r y_i$, $$r = \min_l \{c^{(l)}/\sum_{j \in N^l} \alpha_j^l y_j\}$$	Full KKT implementation

These formalisms are directly supported by theorems and algorithms in the referenced literature and provide a unified underpinning for the implementation and analysis of perfect proportional allocation.

---

Perfect proportional allocation forms the backbone of algorithmic fairness and efficiency in multi-agent, multi-resource systems with diverse constraints. The interplay of combinatorial optimization, convex analysis, and mechanism design ensures the existence (or optimal up-to-relaxation existence) and tractability of such allocations under appropriate structural conditions. The surveyed results provide a rigorous, algorithmically constructive, and computationally efficient foundation for the engineering and analysis of systems requiring exact or nearly-exact proportional fairness.