Parallelism, Program Size, Time, and Temperature in Self-Assembly
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
We settle a number of questions in variants of Winfree’s abstract Tile Assembly Model (aTAM), a model of molecular algorithmic self-assembly. In the “hierarchical” aTAM, two assemblies, both consisting of multiple tiles, are allowed to aggregate together, whereas in the “seeded” aTAM, tiles attach one at a time to a growing assembly. Adleman, Cheng, Goel, and Huang (Running Time and Program Size for Self-Assembled Squares, STOC 2001) showed how to assemble an n × n square in O(n) time in the seeded aTAM using O( logn log logn ) unique tile types, showed that both of these parameters are optimal, and asked whether the hierarchical aTAM could allow a tile system to use the ability to form large assemblies in parallel before they attach to break the Ω(n) lower bound for assembly time. We show there is a tile system with the optimal O( log n log logn ) tile types that assembles an n × n square using O(log n) parallel “stages”, which is close to the optimal Ω(log n) stages, forming the final n×n from four n/2×n/2 squares, which are themselves recursively formed from n/4×n/4 squares, etc. However, despite this nearly maximal parallelism, the system requires superlinear time to assemble the square. We leave open the question of whether some hierarchical tile system can break the Ω(n) assembly time lower bound for assembling an n× n square. We extend the definition of partial order tile systems studied by Adleman et al. in a natural way to hierarchical assembly and show that no hierarchical partial order tile system can build any shape with diameter N in less than time Ω(N), demonstrating that in this case the hierarchical model affords no speedup whatsoever over the seeded model. We also strengthen the Ω(N) time lower bound for deterministic seeded systems of Adleman et al. to nondeterministic seeded systems. We then investigate the relationship between the temperature of a tile system and its size. We show that a tile system can in general require temperature that is exponentially greater than its number of tile types. On the other hand, for the special case of 2-cooperative systems, in which all binding events involve at most 2 sides of tiles, it suffices to use temperature linear in the number of tile types. We show that there is a polynomial-time algorithm that, given any tile system T specified by its desired binding behavior, finds a temperature and binding energies (at most exponential in the number of tile types of T ) that realize this behavior or reports that no such energies exist. This result is applied to show that there is a polynomial-time algorithm that, given an n× n square Sn, determines the smallest (non-hierarchical “seeded”) system (at any temperature) that is deterministic and self-assembles Sn. This answers an open question of Adleman, Cheng, Goel, Huang, Kempe, Moisset de Espanes, and Rothemund (Combinatorial Optimization Problems in Self-Assembly, STOC 2002). The first author was supported by the Molecular Programming Project under NSF grant 0832824, the second and fourth authors were supported by NSF Computing Innovation Fellowships, and the third author was supported by NSERC Discovery Grant R2824A01 and the Canada Research Chair in Biocomputing to Lila Kari. California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA, holinc@gmail.com, ddoty@caltech.edu University of Western Ontario, Dept. of Computer Science, London, ON, Canada, N6A 5B7, sseki@csd.uwo.ca. University of Washington, Dept. of Computer Science, Seattle, WA, USA, dsolov@u.washington.edu.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle