Covert Computation in Staged Self-Assembly: Verification Is PSPACE-Complete

Authors David Caballero, Timothy Gomez, Robert Schweller, Tim Wylie



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.ESA.2021.23.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.33 MB
  • 18 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

David Caballero
  • Department of Computer Science, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA
Timothy Gomez
  • Department of Computer Science, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA
Robert Schweller
  • Department of Computer Science, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA
Tim Wylie
  • Department of Computer Science, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, USA

Cite As Get BibTex

David Caballero, Timothy Gomez, Robert Schweller, and Tim Wylie. Covert Computation in Staged Self-Assembly: Verification Is PSPACE-Complete. In 29th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA 2021). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 204, pp. 23:1-23:18, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2021) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ESA.2021.23

Abstract

Staged self-assembly has proven to be a powerful abstract model of self-assembly by modeling laboratory techniques where several nanoscale systems are allowed to assemble separately and then be mixed at a later stage. A fundamental problem in self-assembly is Unique Assembly Verification (UAV), which asks whether a single final assembly is uniquely constructed. This has previously been shown to be Π^{p}₂-hard in staged self-assembly with a constant number of stages, but a more precise complexity classification was left open related to the polynomial hierarchy.
Covert Computation was recently introduced as a way to compute a function while hiding the input to that function for self-assembly systems. These Tile Assembly Computers (TACs), in a growth only negative aTAM system, can compute arbitrary circuits, which proves UAV is coNP-hard in that model. Here, we show that the staged assembly model is capable of covert computation using only 3 stages. We then utilize this construction to show UAV with only 3 stages is Π^{p}₂-hard. We then extend this technique to open problems and prove that general staged UAV is PSPACE-complete. Measuring the complexity of n stage UAV, we show Π^{p}_{n - 1}-hardness. We finish by showing a Π^{p}_{n + 1} algorithm to solve n stage UAV leaving only a constant gap between membership and hardness.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Models of computation
  • Theory of computation → Problems, reductions and completeness
Keywords
  • self-assembly
  • covert computation
  • staged self-assembly
  • assembly verification

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Zachary Abel, Nadia Benbernou, Mirela Damian, Erik D. Demaine, Martin L. Demaine, Robin Flatland, Scott D. Kominers, and Robert Schweller. Shape replication through self-assembly and rnase enzymes. In Proceedings of the 2010 Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 1045-1064, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611973075.85.
  2. Leonard M. Adleman, Qi Cheng, Ashish Goel, Ming-Deh A. Huang, David Kempe, Pablo Moisset de Espanés, and Paul W. K. Rothemund. Combinatorial optimization problems in self-assembly. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 23-32, 2002. Google Scholar
  3. David Caballero, Timothy Gomez, Robert Schweller, and Tim Wylie. Verification and Computation in Restricted Tile Automata. In Cody Geary and Matthew J. Patitz, editors, 26th International Conference on DNA Computing and Molecular Programming (DNA 26), volume 174 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 10:1-10:18, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2020. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DNA.2020.10.
  4. Sarah Cannon, Erik D. Demaine, Martin L. Demaine, Sarah Eisenstat, Matthew J. Patitz, Robert T. Schweller, Scott M Summers, and Andrew Winslow. Two Hands Are Better Than One (up to constant factors): Self-Assembly In The 2HAM vs. aTAM. In 30th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2013), volume 20 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 172-184. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2013. Google Scholar
  5. Angel A. Cantu, Austin Luchsinger, Robert Schweller, and Tim Wylie. Covert Computation in Self-Assembled Circuits. Algorithmica, 83:531-552, 2021. arXiv:1908.06068. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-020-00764-w.
  6. Cameron T. Chalk, Eric Martinez, Robert T. Schweller, Luis Vega, Andrew Winslow, and Tim Wylie. Optimal staged self-assembly of general shapes. Algorithmica, 80(4):1383-1409, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-017-0318-0.
  7. Cameron T. Chalk, Eric Martinez, Robert T. Schweller, Luis Vega, Andrew Winslow, and Tim Wylie. Optimal staged self-assembly of linear assemblies. Natural Computing, 18(3):527-548, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11047-019-09740-y.
  8. Erik Demaine, Matthew Patitz, Robert Schweller, and Scott Summers. Self-assembly of arbitrary shapes using rnase enzymes: Meeting the kolmogorov bound with small scale factor. Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS2011), 9, January 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2011.201.
  9. Erik D Demaine, Martin L Demaine, Sándor P Fekete, Mashhood Ishaque, Eynat Rafalin, Robert T Schweller, and Diane L Souvaine. Staged self-assembly: nanomanufacture of arbitrary shapes with o (1) glues. Natural Computing, 7(3):347-370, 2008. Google Scholar
  10. Erik D. Demaine, Sarah Eisenstat, Mashhood Ishaque, and Andrew Winslow. One-dimensional staged self-assembly. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on DNA computing and molecular programming, DNA'11, pages 100-114, 2011. Google Scholar
  11. Erik D. Demaine, Sándor P. Fekete, Christian Scheffer, and Arne Schmidt. New geometric algorithms for fully connected staged self-assembly. Theoretical Computer Science, 671:4-18, 2017. Computational Self-Assembly. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2016.11.020.
  12. David Doty, Lila Kari, and Benoît Masson. Negative interactions in irreversible self-assembly. Algorithmica, 66(1):153-172, 2013. Google Scholar
  13. Alexandra Keenan, Robert Schweller, Michael Sherman, and Xingsi Zhong. Fast arithmetic in algorithmic self-assembly. Natural Computing, 15(1):115-128, March 2016. Google Scholar
  14. Matthew Patitz and Scott Summers. Identifying shapes using self-assembly. Algorithmica, 64:481-510, 2012. Google Scholar
  15. Robert Schweller, Andrew Winslow, and Tim Wylie. Complexities for high-temperature two-handed tile self-assembly. In Robert Brijder and Lulu Qian, editors, DNA Computing and Molecular Programming, pages 98-109, Cham, 2017. Springer International Publishing. Google Scholar
  16. Robert Schweller, Andrew Winslow, and Tim Wylie. Verification in staged tile self-assembly. Natural Computing, 18(1):107-117, 2019. Google Scholar
  17. Grigory Tikhomirov, Philip Petersen, and Lulu Qian. Fractal assembly of micrometre-scale dna origami arrays with arbitrary patterns. Nature, 552, December 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24655.
  18. Andrew Winslow. Staged self-assembly and polyomino context-free grammars. Natural Computing, 14(2):293-302, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11047-014-9423-z.
  19. Damien Woods, David Doty, Cameron Myhrvold, Joy Hui, Felix Zhou, Peng Yin, and Erik Winfree. Diverse and robust molecular algorithms using reprogrammable dna self-assembly. Nature, 567:366-372, March 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1014-9.
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail