Compatible task matching
Reassign an alternating chain to cover all tasks without reusing a tool.
Adult planning suggestion: about 9–12 · Logic & rule checking · Cooperation & communication
- Players
- Groups of 3
- Time
- 12–18 minutes
- Materials and quantities
- Four fictional task cards A–D, four abstract tool cards X/Y/Z/W, compatibility graph and matching log.
Thirty pupils: ten trios; proposer, mover and checker rotate after the chain is audited.
Prepare
Use the allowed pairs AX, AY, BX, CY, CZ, DZ and DW. A–D and X/Y/Z/W are fictional labels, not pupil names or claims about real equipment. Each task can take at most one tool and each tool can serve at most one task. The printed list is complete; a pair that is not listed is forbidden. Put all cards face up so no social guessing or hidden preference is required.
Play
Try to cover all four tasks. You may undo and reassign earlier legal pairs; a locally available tool is not permanently attached. Record the first trial A–X, C–Y, D–Z, leaving B and W unmatched. B cannot simply take X while A keeps it. To improve the matching, follow a chain of a desired unused edge, an occupied edge back to its task, then another desired edge until a free tool is reached.
Worked example
The chain B–X–A–Y–C–Z–D–W alternates desired and currently occupied edges. Reverse membership along the chain: take B–X, A–Y, C–Z and D–W. All are on the list, and no task or tool repeats. There are now four pairs instead of three. Mark the changed edges before moving cards so an accidental double use of X is visible rather than hidden by rearrangement.
Finish and check
Finish when all four tasks are matched and every edge and uniqueness condition is checked. Four is the maximum here because there are only four tasks and four tools; do not claim the first three-pair attempt is maximal just because B has no immediately free neighbour. The teacher key includes the full chain and final audit. It is not a general algorithm performance test for children.
Adaptation and practical limits
Thirty pupils can work in ten trios as proposer, card mover and edge checker. Adult planning suggestion is roughly 9–12. The university algorithm source is technical background, not a classroom outcome study. Start with the visible three-pair trial and trace by pencil. No one is assigned a public desirability rank, and the task does not ask children to choose or reject real classmates.
Aim: Reassign an alternating chain to cover all tasks without reusing a tool.
Practice within this activity: Distinguish an immediately free choice from a solution needing coordinated reassignment.
Adult observation: Ask where the chain starts and ends and verify no tool is reused.
Mechanism and adaptation: Our version uses maximum-cardinality bipartite matching via reassignment. Examples and sheets are separately written; the earliest inventor is not established here.
Reference checked 25 October 2026: Princeton Algorithms · BipartiteMatching — Technical reference for compatibility matching and alternating paths; fictional task labels and the seven-edge instance are our separate teaching model.
Goals describe observable activity choices, not measured long-term gains or institutional endorsement.
Free alternatives: Use paper or clean reused cardboard and a pencil. Copy the supplied diagrams and tables by hand; no specialist kit or purchase is needed.
Printable materials
Preview at 100% scale, with browser headers and footers off. Cut with suitable help. Keep host keys separate. This is a manual tabletop kit, not an online opponent, automatic judge or solver.
Player compatibility graph
Allowed: AX AY BX CY CZ DZ DW. Every label is fictional.
Player reassignment record
Start trial A–X, C–Y, D–Z. B and W free. Trace an alternating path, then audit the new matching.
| Task | New tool | Allowed? | Used once? |
|---|---|---|---|
| ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ________ | ________ | ________ |
Alternating path: ______________________________
Host / teacher checked example · separate
Thirty pupils: ten trios; proposer, mover and checker rotate after the chain is audited.
Four fictional task cards A–D, four abstract tool cards X/Y/Z/W, compatibility graph and matching log.
Keep this answer page separate. Read the full web rules and preview materials before leading; allow pauses, passing and supported writing.
B–X–A–Y–C–Z–D–W. Reverse its edge membership.
| Task | Tool |
|---|---|
| A | Y |
| B | X |
| C | Z |
| D | W |
Four pairs cover all four tasks/tools, so maximum4. No ranked preferences are involved.
When no rearrangement can cover everyone · separate player exercise
| Task | Allowed tools |
|---|---|
| A | 1,2 |
| B | 1,2 |
| C | 1,2 |
| Pair | Legal edge? | Tool reused? |
|---|---|---|
| ________ | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ________ | ________ |
When no rearrangement can cover everyone · host check
Maximum2: three tasks share only two reachable tools. A1+B2 attains2, proving the bound is tight. Adding the new explicit edge C3 changes the instance and permits A1+B2+C3. Do not use C3 before announcing the changed edge list.
Related activities
When no rearrangement can cover everyone
Keep the original four-task augmenting-chain example. This separate instance has tasks A,B,C and tools1,2,3, but allowed edges only A1,A2,B1,B2,C1,C2. Tool3 exists but has no allowed edge. First ask whether all three tasks can be covered before searching for an endless reassignment.