Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1502.05558

It's a Tough Nanoworld: in Tile Assembly, Cooperation is not (strictly) more Powerful than Competition

Florent Becker·Pierre-Étienne Meunier
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We present a strict separation between the class of "mismatch free" self-assembly systems and general aTAM systems. Mismatch free systems are those systems in which concurrently grown parts must always agree with each other. Tile self-assembly is a model of the formation of crystal growth, in which a large number of particles concurrently and selectively stick to each other, forming complex shapes and structures. It is useful in nanotechnologies, and more generally in the understanding of these processes, ubiquitous in natural systems. The other property of the local assembly process known to change the power of the model is cooperation between two tiles to attach another. We show that disagreement (mismatches) and cooperation are incomparable: neither can be used to simulate the other one. The fact that mismatches are a hard property is especially surprising, since no known, explicit construction of a computational device in tile assembly uses mismatches, except for the recent construction of an intrinsically universal tileset, i.e. a tileset capable of simulating any other tileset up to rescaling. This work shows how to use intrinsic universality in a systematic way to highlight the essence of different features of tile assembly. Moreover, even the most recent experimental realizations do not use competition, which, in view of our results, suggests that a large part of the natural phenomena behind DNA self-assembly remains to be understood experimentally.

Explore related subjects

cs.CGcs.DM

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Florent Becker, Pierre-Étienne Meunier. 2015-02-19. It's a Tough Nanoworld: in Tile Assembly, Cooperation is not (strictly) more Powerful than Competition. https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05558

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Almost Linear Universal Point Sets for Planar Graphs

A point set is universal for planar graphs on $n$ vertices if every such graph has a straight-line drawing without crossings whose vertices belong to the set. We construct universal point sets of size $n^{1+o(1)}$, improving the previous quadratic upper bound. Our construction uses the reduction of Bannister, Cheng, Devanny, and Eppstein from universal point sets to superpatterns for $213$-avoiding permutations. We represent these permutations by ordered rooted forests and construct a small family of intervals containing every such forest. The result follows from a straightforward bound on the size of the family of intervals. GPT-6 Astra assisted in developing the construction and proof.

cs.CG↗
arXiv2026

Some results on Archdeacon's conjecture for rotation systems

A rotation system on $n$ elements assigns to each element a cyclic order of the other $n-1$ elements. A four-element subset is non-planar if its induced rotation system cannot be realized by a crossing-free drawing of $K_4$. As a combinatorial strengthening of Hill's conjecture on the crossing number of the complete graph, Archdeacon conjectured that every rotation system on $n$ elements has at least $H(n)=\frac{1}{4} \lfloor\frac {n}{2}\rfloor \lfloor\frac{n-1}{2}\rfloor \lfloor\frac{n-2}{2}\rfloor \lfloor\frac{n-3}{2}\rfloor$ non-planar four-element subsets. We computationally verify Archdeacon's conjecture for $n\leq 10$ and show that every extremal rotation system in these orders is realizable by a simple drawing. With computer assistance, we prove that every rotation system on $n$ elements has at least $(8/9 - o(1)) H(n)$ non-planar four-element subsets. We also present a proof by hand for a weaker lower bound of $(2/3-o(1)) H(n)$. Finally, extending recent work of Felsner on antipodal pairs in drawings, we show that Archdeacon's conjecture holds for antipodally shellable rotation systems.

cs.CG↗
arXiv2026

The Hyperbolic Surface Distance, Diameter, and Dirichlet Problems

Despite the prominence of hyperbolic surfaces in mathematics, basic algorithmic questions about them, even computing the distance between two points, have remained open, leaving many features of these surfaces inaccessible. The classical machinery assumes a polyhedral structure absent on a smooth surface. We remove these obstacles. We begin with an efficient $O(g^2)$ algorithm for the distance between two points, where $g$ is the genus of the surface. Building on it, we obtain an $O(g^2 \log g)$ method for answering distance queries from a fixed source and, as a consequence, for recentering a Dirichlet domain around an arbitrary point. This understanding of distances on the surface then lets us approximate the diameter to within any $\eps$ in time $O(g^3 \log g / \eps^2)$. We further show that the diameter, a single real number encoding a great deal about the surface, is exactly computable. Its hyperbolic cosine is an algebraic number over the field encoding the coefficients of the hyperbolic isometries defining the surface.

cs.CG↗