Self-assembly with Geometric Tiles

In this work we propose a generalization of Winfree's abstract Tile Assembly Model (aTAM) in which tile types are assigned rigid shapes, or geometries, along each tile face. We examine the number of distinct tile types needed to assemble shapes within this model, the temperature required for efficient assembly, and the problem of designing compact geometric faces to meet given compatibility specifications. We pose the following question: can complex geometric tile faces arbitrarily reduce the number of distinct tile types to assemble shapes? Within the most basic generalization of the aTAM, we show that the answer is no. For almost all n at least $\Omega(\sqrt{\log n})$ tile types are required to uniquely assemble an n×n square, regardless of how much complexity is pumped into the face of each tile type. However, we show for all n we can achieve a matching $O(\sqrt{\log n})$ tile types, beating the known lower bound of Θ(logn / loglogn) that holds for almost all n within the aTAM. Further, our result holds at temperature τ=1. Our next result considers a geometric tile model that is a generalization of the 2-handed abstract tile assembly model in which tile aggregates must move together through obstacle free paths within the plane. Within this model we present a novel construction that harnesses the collision free path requirement to allow for the unique assembly of any n×n square with a sleek O(loglogn) distinct tile types. This construction is of interest in that it is the first tile self-assembly result to harness collision free planar translation to increase efficiency, whereas previous work has simply used the planarity restriction as a desireable quality that could be achieved at reduced efficiency. This surprisingly low tile type result further emphasizes a fundamental open question: Is it possible to assemble n×n squares with O(1) distinct tile types? Essentially, how far can the trade off between the number of distinct tile types required for an assembly and the complexity of each tile type itself be taken?

[1]  E. Winfree,et al.  Synthesis of crystals with a programmable kinetic barrier to nucleation , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  Erik Winfree,et al.  Reducing facet nucleation during algorithmic self-assembly. , 2007, Nano letters.

[3]  John H. Reif,et al.  The Tile Complexity of Linear Assemblies , 2009, ICALP.

[4]  J. Reif,et al.  Logical computation using algorithmic self-assembly of DNA triple-crossover molecules , 2000, Nature.

[5]  P. Rothemund,et al.  Programmable molecular recognition based on the geometry of DNA nanostructures. , 2011, Nature chemistry.

[6]  Qi Cheng,et al.  Linear Self-Assemblies: Equilibria, Entropy and Convergence Rates , 2003 .

[7]  Ashish Goel,et al.  Running time and program size for self-assembled squares , 2001, STOC '01.

[8]  Erik D. Demaine,et al.  Shape replication through self-assembly and RNase enzymes , 2010, SODA '10.

[9]  Matthew J. Patitz,et al.  Strong Fault-Tolerance for Self-Assembly with Fuzzy Temperature , 2010, 2010 IEEE 51st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[10]  Erik D. Demaine,et al.  Staged self-assembly: nanomanufacture of arbitrary shapes with O(1) glues , 2008, Natural Computing.

[11]  Robert T. Schweller,et al.  Temperature 1 self-assembly: deterministic assembly in 3D and probabilistic assembly in 2D , 2009, SODA '11.

[12]  Paul W. K. Rothemund,et al.  Rothemund, P.W.K.: Folding DNA to create nanoscale shapes and patterns. Nature 440, 297-302 , 2006 .

[13]  Natasa Jonoska,et al.  Computation by Self-assembly of DNA Graphs , 2004, Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines.

[14]  Erik Winfree,et al.  Self-healing Tile Sets , 2006, Nanotechnology: Science and Computation.

[15]  M. Sahani,et al.  Algorithmic Self-Assembly of DNA , 2006 .

[16]  John H. Reif,et al.  erratum: Logical computation using algorithmic self-assembly of DNA triple-crossover molecules , 2000, Nature.

[17]  Chris Luhrs,et al.  Polyomino-safe DNA self-assembly via block replacement , 2009, Natural Computing.

[18]  Erik Winfree,et al.  The program-size complexity of self-assembled squares (extended abstract) , 2000, STOC '00.

[19]  N. Seeman,et al.  Design and self-assembly of two-dimensional DNA crystals , 1998, Nature.

[20]  Ming-Yang Kao,et al.  Complexities for generalized models of self-assembly , 2004, SODA '04.

[21]  Erik Winfree,et al.  An information-bearing seed for nucleating algorithmic self-assembly , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  Erik Winfree,et al.  Experimental progress in computation by self-assembly of DNA tilings , 1999, DNA Based Computers.

[23]  Erik Winfree,et al.  Programmable Control of Nucleation for Algorithmic Self-Assembly , 2009, SIAM J. Comput..

[24]  Matthew J. Patitz,et al.  Limitations of self-assembly at temperature 1 , 2009, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[25]  Masayuki Endo,et al.  Inside Cover: Programmed‐Assembly System Using DNA Jigsaw Pieces (Chem. Eur. J. 18/2010) , 2010 .

[26]  Qi Cheng On the Bounded Sum-of-Digits Discrete Logarithm Problem in Finite Fields , 2005, SIAM J. Comput..

[27]  Erik Winfree,et al.  Complexity of Self-Assembled Shapes , 2004, SIAM J. Comput..

[28]  Ming Li,et al.  An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications , 1997, Texts in Computer Science.

[29]  Sudheer Sahu,et al.  Compact Error-Resilient Computational DNA Tiling Assemblies , 2004, DNA.

[30]  Matthew Cook,et al.  Combining self-healing and proofreading in self-assembly , 2008, Natural Computing.

[31]  H. Sugiyama,et al.  Programmed-assembly system using DNA jigsaw pieces. , 2010, Chemistry.