Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Nathaniel Bryans

dblp:11/8262 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2011
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Algorithms and data structures · 50% Computational complexity · 25% Automata and formal languages · 25%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Algorithms and data structures
self-assembly
0.112011
The Power of Nondeterminism in Self-Assembly · SODA 2011
Computational complexity › complexity classes › polynomial hierarchy
sigma-2-p completeness
0.112011
The Power of Nondeterminism in Self-Assembly · SODA 2011
Algorithms and data structures › self-assembly
tile assembly model
0.112011
The Power of Nondeterminism in Self-Assembly · SODA 2011
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2011 The Power of Nondeterminism in Self-Assembly
abstract
We investigate the role of nondeterminism in Winfree's abstract tile assembly model, which was conceived to model artificial molecular self-assembling systems constructed from DNA. By nondeterminism we do not mean a magical ability such as that possessed by a nondeterministic algorithm to search an exponential-size space in polynomial time. Rather, we study realistically implementable systems that retain a different sense of determinism in that they are guaranteed to produce a unique shape but are nondeterministic in that they do not guarantee which tile types will be placed where within the shape. We show a “molecular computability” result: there is an infinite shape S that is uniquely assembled by a tile system but not by any deterministic tile system. We show a “molecular complexity” result: there is a finite shape S that is uniquely assembled by a tile system with c tile types, but every deterministic tile system that uniquely assembles S has more than c tile types. In fact we extend the technique to derive a stronger (classical complexity theoretic) result, showing that the problem of finding the minimum number of tile types that uniquely assemble a given finite shape is ΣP2-complete. In contrast, the problem of finding the minimum number of deterministic tile types that uniquely assemble a shape is NP-complete [5].
Nathaniel Bryans, Ehsan Chiniforooshan, David Doty, Lila Kari, Shinnosuke Seki 0001
SODA1