Synthesizing Small and Reliable Tile Sets for Patterned DNA Self-assembly

  • Tuomo Lempiäinen
  • Eugen Czeizler
  • Pekka Orponen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6937)


We consider the problem of finding, for a given 2D pattern of colored tiles, a minimal set of tile types self-assembling to this pattern in the abstract Tile Assembly Model of Winfree (1998). This Patterned self-Assembly Tile set Synthesis (PATS) problem was first introduced by Ma and Lombardi (2008), and subsequently studied by Göös and Orponen (2011), who presented an exhaustive partition-search branch-and-bound algorithm (briefly PS-BB) for it. However, finding the true minimal tile sets is very time consuming, and PS-BB is not well-suited for finding small but not necessarily minimal solutions. In this paper, we modify the basic partition-search framework by using a heuristic to optimize the order in which the algorithm traverses its search space. We find that by running several parallel instances of the modified algorithm PS-H, the search time for small tile sets can be shortened considerably. We also introduce a method for computing the reliability of a tile set, i.e. the probability of its error-free self-assembly to the target tiling, based on Winfree’s analysis of the kinetic Tile Assembly Model (1998). We present data on the reliability of tile sets found by the algorithms and find that also here PS-H constitutes a significant improvement over PS-BB.


Minimal Solution Full Adder Tile Type Wall Clock Time Input Edge 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Czeizler, E., Lempiäinen, T., Orponen, P.: A design framework for carbon nanotube circuits affixed on DNA origami tiles. In: Proc. 8th Ann. Conf. Foundations of Nanoscience, pp. 186–187 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gomes, C.P., Selman, B.: Algorithm portfolios. Artif. Intell. 126, 43–62 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Göös, M., Orponen, P.: Synthesizing minimal tile sets for patterned DNA self-assembly. In: Sakakibara, Y., Mi, Y. (eds.) DNA 16 2010. LNCS, vol. 6518, pp. 71–82. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim, K.N., Sarveswaran, K., Mark, L., Lieberman, M.: DNA origami as self-assembling circuit boards. In: Calude, C.S., Hagiya, M., Morita, K., Rozenberg, G., Timmis, J. (eds.) Unconventional Computation. LNCS, vol. 6079, pp. 56–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lifschitz, V.: What is answer set programming? In: Proc. 23rd Natl. Conf. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1594–1597 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu, W., Zhong, H., Wang, R., Seeman, N.C.: Crystalline two-dimensional DNA-origami arrays. Angewandte Chemie International Edition 50(1), 264–267 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luby, M., Sinclair, A., Zuckerman, D.: Optimal speedup of Las Vegas algorithms. Information Processing Letters 47(4), 173–180 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ma, X., Lombardi, F.: Synthesis of tile sets for DNA self-assembly. IEEE Trans. CAD of Integrated Circuits and Systems 27, 963–967 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maune, H.T., Han, S., Barish, R.D., Bockrath, M., Goddard III, W.A., Rothemund, P.W.K., Winfree, E.: Self-assembly of carbon nanotubes into two-dimensional geometries using DNA origami templates. Nature Nanotechnology 5, 61–66 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rajendran, A., Endo, M., Katsuda, Y., Hidaka, K., Sugiyama, H.: Programmed two-dimensional self-assembly of multiple DNA origami jigsaw pieces. ACS Nano 5(1), 665–671 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rothemund, P.W.K., Winfree, E.: The program-size complexity of self-assembled squares. In: Proc. 32nd Ann. ACM Theory of Computing, pp. 459–468 (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rothemund, P.W.K.: Folding DNA to create nanoscale shapes and patterns. Nature 440, 297–302 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Syrjänen, T., Niemelä, I.: The Smodels system. In: Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, pp. 434–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Winfree, E., Liu, F., Wenzler, L.A., Seeman, N.C.: Design and self-assembly of two-dimensional DNA crystals. Nature 394 (1998)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Winfree, E.: Simulations of Computing by Self-Assembly. Technical Report CSTR 1998.22, California Institute of Technology (1998)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yan, H., Park, S.H., Finkelstein, G., Reif, J.H., LaBean, T.H.: DNA-templated self-assembly of protein arrays and highly conducive nanowires. Science 301 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tuomo Lempiäinen
    • 1
  • Eugen Czeizler
    • 1
  • Pekka Orponen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information and Computer Science, Helsinki Institute for Information Technology HIITAalto University School of ScienceAaltoFinland

Personalised recommendations