Exact Shapes and Turing Universality at Temperature 1 with a Single Negative Glue
Is Winfree’s abstract Tile Assembly Model (aTAM) “powerful?” Well, if certain tiles are required to “cooperate” in order to be able to bind to a growing tile assembly (a.k.a., temperature 2 self-assembly), then Turing universal computation and the efficient self-assembly of N ×N squares is achievable in the aTAM (Rotemund and Winfree, STOC 2000). So yes, in a computational sense, the aTAM is quite powerful! However, if one completely removes this cooperativity condition (a.k.a., temperature 1 self-assembly), then the computational “power” of the aTAM (i.e., its ability to support Turing universal computation and the efficient self-assembly of N ×N squares) becomes unknown. On the plus side, the aTAM, at temperature 1, is not only Turing universal but also supports the efficient self-assembly N ×N squares if self-assembly is allowed to utilize three spatial dimensions (Fu, Schweller and Cook, SODA 2011). In this paper, we investigate the theoretical “power” of a seemingly simple, restrictive variant of Winfree’s aTAM in which (1) the absolute value of every glue strength is 1, (2) there is a single negative strength glue type and (3) unequal glues cannot interact (i.e., glue functions must be “diagonal”). We call this abstract model of self-assembly the restricted glue Tile Assembly Model (rgTAM). We achieve two positive results. First, we show that the tile complexity of uniquely producing an N ×N square in the rgTAM is O(logN). In our second result, we prove that the rgTAM is Turing universal.
KeywordsBinary String Tile Type Binary Counter Tile Assembly Model Green Tile
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Adleman, L., Cheng, Q., Goel, A., Huang, M.-D.: Running time and program size for self-assembled squares. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 740–748. ACM, New York (2001)Google Scholar
- 5.Cook, M., Fu, Y., Schweller, R.: Temperature 1 self-assembly: Deterministic assembly in 3d and probabilistic assembly in 2d. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (2011)Google Scholar
- 8.Doty, D., Lutz, J.H., Patitz, M.J., Summers, S.M., Woods, D.: Intrinsic universality in self-assembly. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pp. 275–286 (2009)Google Scholar
- 9.Doty, D., Patitz, M.J., Reishus, D., Schweller, R.T., Summers, S.M.: Strong fault-tolerance for self-assembly with fuzzy temperature. In: Proceedings of the 51st Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS 2010), pp. 417–426 (2010)Google Scholar
- 11.Kao, M.-Y., Schweller, R.T.: Reducing tile complexity for self-assembly through temperature programming. In: Proceedings of the 17th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA 2006), Miami, Florida, January 2006, pp. 571-580 (2007)Google Scholar
- 15.Luhrs, C.: Polyomino-safe dna self-assembly via block replacement. DNA, 112–126 (2008)Google Scholar
- 16.Majumder, U., Reif, J.: A framework for designing novel magnetic tiles capable of complex self-assemblies. In: Calude, C.S., Costa, J.F., Freund, R., Oswald, M., Rozenberg, G. (eds.) UC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5204, pp. 129–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
- 20.Rothemund, P.W.K.: Theory and experiments in algorithmic self-assembly, Ph.D. thesis, University of Southern California (December 2001)Google Scholar
- 24.Winfree, E.: Algorithmic self-assembly of DNA, Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology (June 1998)Google Scholar