Natural Computing

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 1275–1294 | Cite as

On the hierarchy of conservation laws in a cellular automaton

Article

Abstract

Conservation laws in cellular automata (CA) are studied as an abstraction of the conservation laws observed in nature. In addition to the usual real-valued conservation laws we also consider more general group-valued and semigroup-valued conservation laws. The (algebraic) conservation laws in a CA form a hierarchy, based on the range of the interactions they take into account. The conservation laws with smaller interaction ranges are the homomorphic images of those with larger interaction ranges, and for each specific range there is a most general law that incorporates all those with that range. For one-dimensional CA, such a most general conservation law has—even in the semigroup-valued case—an effectively constructible finite presentation, while for higher-dimensional CA such effective construction exists only in the group-valued case. It is even undecidable whether a given two-dimensional CA conserves a given semigroup-valued energy assignment. Although the local properties of this hierarchy are tractable in the one-dimensional case, its global properties turn out to be undecidable. In particular, we prove that it is undecidable whether this hierarchy is trivial or unbounded. We point out some interconnections between the structure of this hierarchy and the dynamical properties of the CA. In particular, we show that positively expansive CA do not have non-trivial real-valued conservation laws.

Keywords

Cellular automata Conservation laws Energy Reversibility Undecidability Dynamical systems Chaos 

References

  1. Biryukov AP (1967) Some algorithmic problems for finitely defined commutative semigroups. Sib Math J 8:384–391MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Blondel VD, Cassaigne J, Nichitiu C (2002) On the presence of periodic configurations in turing machines and in counter machines. Theor Comput Sci 289:573–590MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boccara N, Fukś H (1998) Cellular automaton rules conserving the number of active sites. J Phys A 31:6007–6018MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Conway JH, Lagarias JC (1990) Tiling with polyominoes and combinatorial group theory. J Comb Theory A 53:183–208MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Durand B, Formenti E, Róka Z (2003) Number conserving cellular automata I: decidability. Theor Comput Sci 299:523–535MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Finelli M, Manzini G, Margara K (1998) Lyapunov exponents versus expansivity and sensitivity in cellular automata. J Complex 14:210–233MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Formenti E, Grange A (2003) Number conserving cellular automata II: dynamics. Theor Comput Sci 304:269–290MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Formenti E, Kari J, Taati S (2008) The most general conservation law for a cellular automaton. In: Hirsch EA, Razborov AA, Semenov AL, Slissenko A (eds) CSR vol 5010 of Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, New York, pp 194–203Google Scholar
  9. Fukś H (2000) A class of cellular automata equivalent to deterministic particle systems. In: Feng S, Lawniczak AT, Varadhan SRS (eds) Hydrodynamic limits and related topics, vol 27 of Fields institute communications. American Mathematical Society, Providence, pp 57–69Google Scholar
  10. Grillet PA (1995) Semigroups: an introduction to the structure theory. Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Hardy J, de Pazzis O, Pomeau Y (1976) Molecular dynamics of a classical lattice gas: transport properties and time correlation functions. Phys Rev A 13:1949–1961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hattori T, Takesue S (1991) Additive conserved quantities in discrete-time lattice dynamical systems. Physica D 49:295–322MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hedlund GA (1969) Endomorphisms and automorphisms of the shift dynamical system. Math Syst Theory 3:320–375MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kari J (1994) Reversibility and surjectivity problems of cellular automata. J Comput Syst Sci 48:149–182MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kari J (2000) Linear cellular automata with multiple state variables. In: Reichel H, Tison S (eds) STACS vol 1770 of Lecture notes in computer science. Springer, New York, pp 110–121Google Scholar
  16. Kari J (2005) Theory of cellular automata: a survey. Theor Comput Sci 334:3–33MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kůrka P (1997) Languages, equicontinuity and attractors in cellular automata. Ergod Theory Dyn Syst 17:417–433MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kůrka P (2003) Topological and symbolic dynamics, vol 11 of Cours Spécialisés, Société Mathématique de FranceGoogle Scholar
  19. Manzini G, Margara L (1999) A complete and efficiently computable topological classification of d-dimensional linear cellular automata over \({{\mathbb{Z}}_m}.\) Theor Comput Sci 221:157–177MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Minsky M (1967) Computation: finite and infinite machines. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Moore EF (1962) Machine models of self-reproduction. In: Proceedings of symposia in applied mathematics. AMS, Providence, pp 17–33Google Scholar
  22. Moreira A, Boccara N, Goles E (2004) On conservative and monotone one-dimensional cellular automata and their particle representation. Theor Comput Sci 325:285–316MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Myhill J (1963) The converse of Moore’s garden-of-Eden theorem. Proc Am Math Soc 14:685–686Google Scholar
  24. Nasu M (1995) Textile systems for endomorphisms and automorphisms of the shift. Mem Am Math Soc 114, no. 546, pp viii + 215Google Scholar
  25. Pivato M (2002) Conservation laws in cellular automata. Nonlinearity 15:1781–1793MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pomeau Y (1984) Invariant in cellular automata. J Phys A 17:L415–L418MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Robison AD (1987) Fast computation of additive cellular automata. Complex Syst 1:211–216MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Takesue S (1987) Reversible cellular automata and statistical mechanics. Phys Rev Lett 59:2499–2502MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Thurston WP (1990) Conway’s tiling groups. Am Math Mon 97:757–773MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratoire I3SUniversité de Nice Sophia AntipolisSophia Antipolis CedexFrance
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations