The non-cooperative tile assembly model is not intrinsically universal or capable of bounded Turing machine simulation

ABSTRACT

The field of algorithmic self-assembly is concerned with the computational and expressive power of nanoscale self-assembling molecular systems. In the well-studied cooperative, or temperature 2, abstract tile assembly model it is known that there is a tile set to simulate any Turing machine and an intrinsically universal tile set that simulates the shapes and dynamics of any instance of the model, up to spatial rescaling. It has been an open question as to whether the seemingly simpler noncooperative, or temperature 1, model is capable of such behaviour. Here we show that this is not the case by showing that there is no tile set in the noncooperative model that is intrinsically universal, nor one capable of time-bounded Turing machine simulation within a bounded region of the plane.

Although the noncooperative model intuitively seems to lack the complexity and power of the cooperative model it has been exceedingly hard to prove this. One reason is that there have been few tools to analyse the structure of complicated paths in the plane. This paper provides a number of such tools. A second reason is that almost every obvious and small generalisation to the model (e.g. allowing error, 3D, non-square tiles, signals/wires on tiles, tiles that repel each other, parallel synchronous growth) endows it with great computational, and sometimes simulation, power. Our main results show that all of these generalisations provably increase computational and/or simulation power. Our results hold for both deterministic and nondeterministic noncooperative systems. Our first main result stands in stark contrast with the fact that for both the cooperative tile assembly model, and for 3D noncooperative tile assembly, there are respective intrinsically universal tilesets. Our second main result gives a new technique (reduction to simulation) for proving negative results about computation in tile assembly.

References

1. B. Behsaz, J. Maňuch, and L. Stacho. Turing universality of step-wise and stage assembly at temperature 1. In DNA18: Proc. of International Meeting on DNA Computing and Molecular Programming, volume 7433 of LNCS, pages 1–11. Springer, 2012.
2. Mireille Bousquet-Mélou. Families of prudent self-avoiding walks. J. Comb. Theory, Ser. A, 117(3):313–344, 2010.
3. Sarah Cannon, Erik D. Demaine, Martin L. Demaine, Sarah Eisenstat, Matthew J. Patitz, Robert Schweller, Scott M. Summers, and Andrew Winslow. Two hands are better than one (up to constant factors). In STACS: Proceedings of the Thirtieth International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 172– 184. LIPIcs, 2013. Arxiv preprint: 1201.1650.
4. Harish Chandran, Nikhil Gopalkrishnan, and John Reif. Tile complexity of approximate squares. Algorithmica, 66(1):1–17, 2013.
5. Matthew Cook, Yunhui Fu, and Robert T. Schweller. Temperature 1 self-assembly: deterministic assembly in 3D and probabilistic assembly in 2D. In SODA: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 570–589, 2011. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:0912.0027.
6. Erik D. Demaine, Martin L. Demaine, Sándor P. Fekete, Matthew J. Patitz, Robert T. Schweller, Andrew Winslow, and Damien Woods. One tile to rule them all: Simulating any tile assembly system with a single universal tile. In ICALP: Proceedings of the 41st International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, volume 8572 of LNCS, pages 368–379. Springer, 2014. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1212.4756.
7. Erik D. Demaine, Matthew J. Patitz, Trent A. Rogers, Robert T. Schweller, Scott M. Summers, and Damien Woods. The two-handed tile assembly model is not intrinsically universal. In ICALP: Proceedings of the 40th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, volume 7965 of LNCS, pages 400–412. Springer, July 2013. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1306.6710.
8. David Doty, Jack H. Lutz, Matthew J. Patitz, Robert T. Schweller, Scott M. Summers, and Damien Woods. The tile assembly model is intrinsically universal. In FOCS: Proceedings of the 53rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 439–446. IEEE, October 2012. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1111.3097.
9. David Doty, Jack H. Lutz, Matthew J. Patitz, Scott M. Summers, and Damien Woods. Intrinsic universality in self-assembly. In STACS: Proceedings of the 27th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 275–286, 2009. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1001.0208.
10. David Doty, Matthew J. Patitz, and Scott M. Summers. Limitations of selfassembly at temperature 1. Theoretical Computer Science, 412(1–2):145–158, 2011.
11. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:0906.3251.
12. Sándor P. Fekete, Jacob Hendricks, Matthew J. Patitz, Trent A. Rogers, and Robert T. Schweller. Universal computation with arbitrary polyomino tiles in non-cooperative self-assembly. In SODA: ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 148–167. SIAM, 2015.
13. Paul J. Flory. Principles of Polymer Chemistry. Cornell University Press, 1953.
14. Bin Fu, Matthew J. Patitz, Robert T. Schweller, and Robert Sheline. Self-assembly with geometric tiles. In ICALP: Proceedings of the 39th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, volume 7391 of LNCS, pages 714–725. Springer, 2012.
15. Oscar Gilbert, Jacob Hendricks, Matthew J Patitz, and Trent A Rogers. Computing in continuous space with self-assembling polygonal tiles. In SODA: ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 937–956. SIAM, 2016. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1503.00327.
16. Jacob Hendricks, Matthew J. Patitz, Trent A. Rogers, and Scott M. Summers. The power of duples (in self-assembly): It’s not so hip to be square. In COCOON: Proceedings of 20th International Computing and Combinatorics Conference, pages 215–226, 2014. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1402.4515.
17. Natasa Jonoska and Daria Karpenko. Active tile self-assembly, part 1: Universality at temperature 1. Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci., 25(2):141–164, 2014.
18. D. E. Knuth. Mathematics and computer science: coping with finiteness. Mathematics: people, problems, results, 2, 1984.
19. Ján Maňuch, Ladislav Stacho, and Christine Stoll. Two lower bounds for selfassemblies at temperature 1. Journal of Computational Biology, 17(6):841–852, 2010.
20. Pierre-Étienne Meunier. Non-cooperative algorithms in self-assembly. In UCNC: Unconventional Computation and Natural Computation, volume 9252 of LNCS, pages 263–276. Springer, 2015.
21. Pierre-Étienne Meunier, Matthew J. Patitz, Scott M. Summers, Guillaume Theyssier, Andrew Winslow, and Damien Woods. Intrinsic universality in tile self-assembly requires cooperation. In SODA: Proceedings of the ACMSIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 752–771, 2014. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1304.1679.
22. Pierre-Étienne Meunier and Damien Woods. The non-cooperative tile assembly model is not intrinsically universal or capable of bounded turing machine simulation. 2017. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1702.00353.
23. Jennifer E. Padilla, Matthew J. Patitz, Robert T. Schweller, Nadrian C. Seeman, Scott M. Summers, and Xingsi Zhong. Asynchronous signal passing for tile self-assembly: Fuel efficient computation and efficient assembly of shapes. International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science, 25(4):459–488, 2014. Arxiv preprint: arxiv:1202.5012.
24. Matthew J. Patitz, Robert T. Schweller, and Scott M. Summers. Exact shapes and Turing universality at temperature 1 with a single negative glue. In DNA 17: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on DNA Computing and Molecular Programming, LNCS, pages 175–189. Springer, September 2011. Arxiv preprint: arXiv:1105.1215.
25. Paul W. K. Rothemund. Theory and Experiments in Algorithmic Self-Assembly. PhD thesis, University of Southern California, December 2001.
26. Paul W. K. Rothemund and Erik Winfree. The program-size complexity of self-assembled squares (extended abstract). In STOC: Proceedings of the thirtysecond annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 459–468, Portland, Oregon, United States, 2000. ACM.
27. David Soloveichik and Erik Winfree. Complexity of self-assembled shapes. SIAM Journal on Computing, 36(6):1544–1569, 2007.
28. Erik Winfree. Algorithmic Self-Assembly of DNA. PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology, June 1998.
29. Erik Winfree. Simulations of computing by self-assembly. Technical Report Caltech CS TR:1998.22, California Institute of Technology, 1998.
30. Damien Woods. Intrinsic universality and the computational power of self-assembly. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 373(2046), 2015.
31. dx.

Index Terms

• Applied computing

  • Physical sciences and engineering

    • Chemistry

• Theory of computation

  • Design and analysis of algorithms

    • Distributed algorithms

      • Self-organization

  • Models of computation

    • Computability

      • Turing machines

    • Concurrency

      • Distributed computing models

  • Randomness, geometry and discrete structures

    • Computational geometry