  To guarantee all agents are matched in general, the classic Deferred
Acceptance algorithm needs complete preference lists. In practice, preference
lists are short, yet stable matching still works well. This raises two
questions:
  $\bullet$ Why does it work well?
  $\bullet$ Which proposals should agents include in their preference lists?
  We study these questions in a model, introduced by Lee [17], with preferences
based on correlated cardinal utilities: these utilities are based on common
public ratings of each agent together with individual private adjustments. Lee
showed that for suitable utility functions, in large markets, with high
probability, for most agents, all stable matchings yield similar valued
utilities. By means of a new analysis, we strengthen Lee's result, showing that
in large markets, with high probability, for $\it all$ but the agents with the
lowest public ratings, all stable matchings yield similar valued utilities. We
can then deduce that for $\it all$ but the agents with the lowest public
ratings, each agent has an easily identified length $O(\log n)$ preference list
that includes all of its stable matches, addressing the second question above.
We note that this identification uses an initial communication phase.
  We extend these results to settings where the two sides have unequal numbers
of agents, to many-to-one settings, e.g. employers and workers, and we also
show the existence of an $\epsilon$-Bayes-Nash equilibrium in which every agent
makes relatively few proposals. These results all rely on a new technique for
sidestepping the conditioning between the tentative matching events that occur
over the course of a run of the Deferred Acceptance algorithm. We complement
these theoretical results with an experimental study.
