Intrinsic universality and the computational power of self-assembly

Molecular self-assembly, the formation of large structures by small pieces of matter sticking together according to simple local interactions, is a ubiquitous phenomenon. A challenging engineering goal is to design a few molecules so that large numbers of them can self-assemble into desired complicated target objects. Indeed, we would like to understand the ultimate capabilities and limitations of this bottom-up fabrication process. We look to theoretical models of algorithmic self-assembly, where small square tiles stick together according to simple local rules in order to carry out a crystal growth process. In this survey, we focus on the use of simulation between such models to classify and separate their computational and expressive powers. Roughly speaking, one model simulates another if they grow the same structures, via the same dynamical growth processes. Our journey begins with the result that there is a single intrinsically universal tile set that, with appropriate initialization and spatial scaling, simulates any instance of Winfree's abstract Tile Assembly Model. This universal tile set exhibits something stronger than Turing universality: it captures the geometry and dynamics of any simulated system in a very direct way. From there we find that there is no such tile set in the more restrictive non-cooperative model, proving it weaker than the full Tile Assembly Model. In the two-handed model, where large structures can bind together in one step, we encounter an infinite set of infinite hierarchies of strictly increasing simulation power. Towards the end of our trip, we find one tile to rule them all: a single rotatable flipable polygonal tile that simulates any tile assembly system. We find another tile that aperiodically tiles the plane (but with small gaps). These and other recent results show that simulation is giving rise to a kind of computational complexity theory for self-assembly. It seems this could be the beginning of a much longer journey, so directions for future work are suggested.

[1]  A. Turberfield,et al.  A DNA-fuelled molecular machine made of DNA , 2022 .

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

[3]  Jennifer E. Padilla,et al.  A Signal-Passing DNA-Strand-Exchange Mechanism for Active Self-Assembly of DNA Nanostructures. , 2015, Angewandte Chemie.

[4]  Jacob Hendricks,et al.  Signal transmission across tile assemblies: 3D static tiles simulate active self-assembly by 2D signal-passing tiles , 2014, Natural Computing.

[5]  Jacob Hendricks,et al.  On the Equivalence of Cellular Automata and the Tile Assembly Model , 2013, MCU.

[6]  Shawn M. Douglas,et al.  Folding DNA into Twisted and Curved Nanoscale Shapes , 2009, Science.

[7]  Grégory Lafitte,et al.  Universal Tilings , 2007, STACS.

[8]  Erik Winfree,et al.  Active self-assembly of algorithmic shapes and patterns in polylogarithmic time , 2013, ITCS '13.

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

[10]  Natasa Jonoska,et al.  Active Tile Self-assembly, Part 1: Universality at temperature 1 , 2014, Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci..

[11]  Nicolas Ollinger,et al.  Bulking I: An abstract theory of bulking , 2011, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[12]  David Furcy,et al.  Scaled pier fractals do not strictly self-assemble , 2015, Natural Computing.

[13]  Pamela E. Constantinou,et al.  From Molecular to Macroscopic via the Rational Design of a Self-Assembled 3D DNA Crystal , 2009, Nature.

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

[15]  Jacob Hendricks,et al.  The Simulation Powers and Limitations of Hierarchical Self-Assembly Systems , 2015, MCU.

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

[17]  Erik D. Demaine,et al.  The Two-Handed Tile Assembly Model is not Intrinsically Universal , 2015, Algorithmica.

[18]  P. Rothemund Folding DNA to create nanoscale shapes and patterns , 2006, Nature.

[19]  Andrew Winslow,et al.  Tight Bounds for Active Self-Assembly Using an Insertion Primitive , 2015, Algorithmica.

[20]  Bin Fu,et al.  Self-assembly with Geometric Tiles , 2011, ICALP.

[21]  E. Winfree,et al.  Toward reliable algorithmic self-assembly of DNA tiles: a fixed-width cellular automaton pattern. , 2008, Nano letters.

[22]  Eric Goles Ch.,et al.  Communication complexity and intrinsic universality in cellular automata , 2011, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[23]  Hao Wang Proving theorems by pattern recognition — II , 1961 .

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

[25]  Nadrian C. Seeman,et al.  DNA Components for Molecular Architecture , 1997 .

[26]  N. Seeman,et al.  DNA double-crossover molecules. , 1993, Biochemistry.

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

[28]  Turlough Neary,et al.  Small fast universal Turing machines , 2006, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[29]  Nicolas Ollinger,et al.  Four states are enough! , 2011, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[30]  Erik D. Demaine,et al.  Two Hands Are Better Than One (up to constant factors): Self-Assembly In The 2HAM vs. aTAM , 2013, STACS.

[31]  Jack H. Lutz,et al.  The Tile Assembly Model is Intrinsically Universal , 2011, 2012 IEEE 53rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[32]  Erik Winfree,et al.  Two computational primitives for algorithmic self-assembly: copying and counting. , 2005, Nano letters.

[33]  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.

[34]  Jacob Hendricks,et al.  Doubles and negatives are positive (in self-assembly) , 2015, Natural Computing.

[35]  Grégory Lafitte,et al.  An Almost Totally Universal Tile Set , 2009, TAMC.

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

[37]  Sándor P. Fekete,et al.  Universal Computation with Arbitrary Polyomino Tiles in Non-Cooperative Self-Assembly , 2014, SODA.

[38]  David Furcy,et al.  Scaled Tree Fractals Do not Strictly Self-assemble , 2014, UCNC.

[39]  Robin Milner,et al.  Operational and Algebraic Semantics of Concurrent Processes , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.

[40]  Pierre-Etienne Meunier,et al.  Non-cooperative Algorithms in Self-assembly , 2014, UCNC.

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

[42]  Robert T. Schweller,et al.  Strict Self-Assembly of Fractals Using Multiple Hands , 2015, Algorithmica.

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

[44]  Ashish Goel,et al.  Combinatorial optimization problems in self-assembly , 2002, STOC '02.

[45]  Jacob Hendricks,et al.  Computing in continuous space with self-assembling polygonal tiles (extended abstract) , 2015, SODA.

[46]  Wenyan Liu,et al.  Hierarchical self assembly of patterns from the Robinson tilings: DNA tile design in an enhanced Tile Assembly Model , 2011, Natural Computing.

[47]  Shinnosuke Seki,et al.  Dynamic Simulation of 1D Cellular Automata in the Active aTAM , 2015, New Generation Computing.

[48]  Constantine G. Evans Crystals that Count! Physical Principles and Experimental Investigations of DNA Tile Self-Assembly , 2014 .

[49]  E. Winfree,et al.  Robust self-replication of combinatorial information via crystal growth and scission , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[50]  Matthew J. Patitz An introduction to tile-based self-assembly and a survey of recent results , 2014, Natural Computing.

[51]  Daria Karpenko,et al.  Active Tile Self-assembly and Simulations of Computational Systems , 2015 .

[52]  David Doty,et al.  Theory of algorithmic self-assembly , 2012, CACM.

[53]  Nicolas Ollinger,et al.  Bulking II: Classifications of cellular automata , 2010, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[54]  Matthew J. Patitz,et al.  Intrinsic universality in tile self-assembly requires cooperation , 2013, SODA.

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

[56]  Pedro M. Domingos A few useful things to know about machine learning , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[57]  Hao Yan,et al.  DNA Origami with Complex Curvatures in Three-Dimensional Space , 2011, Science.

[58]  Zhi Xu,et al.  Triangular and Hexagonal Tile Self-assembly Systems , 2012, Computation, Physics and Beyond.

[59]  P. Yin,et al.  Complex shapes self-assembled from single-stranded DNA tiles , 2012, Nature.

[60]  Nicolas Schabanel,et al.  Intrinsic Simulations between Stochastic Cellular Automata , 2012, AUTOMATA & JAC.

[61]  Jack H. Lutz,et al.  Intrinsic Universality in Self-Assembly , 2010, STACS.

[62]  E. Winfree,et al.  Algorithmic Self-Assembly of DNA Sierpinski Triangles , 2004, PLoS biology.

[63]  Jacob Hendricks,et al.  The Simulation Powers and Limitations of Higher Temperature Hierarchical Self-Assembly Systems , 2017, Fundam. Informaticae.

[64]  Erik D. Demaine,et al.  One Tile to Rule Them All: Simulating Any Tile Assembly System with a Single Universal Tile , 2014, ICALP.

[65]  Florent Becker,et al.  It's a Tough Nanoworld: in Tile Assembly, Cooperation is not (strictly) more Powerful than Competition , 2015, ArXiv.

[66]  Nicolas Ollinger Universalities in cellular automata a (short) survey , 2008, JAC.

[67]  Jacob Hendricks,et al.  The Power of Duples (in Self-Assembly): It's Not So Hip to Be Square , 2014, COCOON.