On the Transformation Capability of Feasible Mechanisms for Programmable Matter
March 13, 2017 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Othon Michail, George Skretas, Paul G. Spirakis
arXiv ID
1703.04381
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Cross-listed
cs.DC,
cs.RO
Citations
41
Venue
International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
In this work, we study theoretical models of \emph{programmable matter} systems. The systems under consideration consist of spherical modules, kept together by magnetic forces and able to perform two minimal mechanical operations (or movements): \emph{rotate} around a neighbor and \emph{slide} over a line. In terms of modeling, there are $n$ nodes arranged in a 2-dimensional grid and forming some initial \emph{shape}. The goal is for the initial shape $A$ to \emph{transform} to some target shape $B$ by a sequence of movements. Most of the paper focuses on \emph{transformability} questions, meaning whether it is in principle feasible to transform a given shape to another. We first consider the case in which only rotation is available to the nodes. Our main result is that deciding whether two given shapes $A$ and $B$ can be transformed to each other, is in $\mathbf{P}$. We then insist on rotation only and impose the restriction that the nodes must maintain global connectivity throughout the transformation. We prove that the corresponding transformability question is in $\mathbf{PSPACE}$ and study the problem of determining the minimum \emph{seeds} that can make feasible, otherwise infeasible transformations. Next we allow both rotations and slidings and prove universality: any two connected shapes $A,B$ of the same order, can be transformed to each other without breaking connectivity. The worst-case number of movements of the generic strategy is $Ξ©(n^2)$. We improve this to $O(n)$ parallel time, by a pipelining strategy, and prove optimality of both by matching lower bounds. In the last part of the paper, we turn our attention to distributed transformations. The nodes are now distributed processes able to perform communicate-compute-move rounds. We provide distributed algorithms for a general type of transformations.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted