Researcher profile

David Furcy

David Furcy contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Improved lower and upper bounds on the tile complexity of uniquely self-assembling a thin rectangle non-cooperatively in 3D

We investigate a fundamental question regarding a benchmark class of shapes in one of the simplest, yet most widely utilized abstract models of algorithmic tile self-assembly. Specifically, we study the directed tile complexity of a $k \times N$ thin rectangle in Winfree's abstract Tile Assembly Model, assuming that cooperative binding cannot be enforced (temperature-1 self-assembly) and that tiles are allowed to be placed at most one step into the third dimension (just-barely 3D). While the directed tile complexities of a square and a scaled-up version of any algorithmically specified shape at temperature 1 in just-barely 3D are both asymptotically the same as they are (respectively) at temperature 2 in 2D, the bounds on the directed tile complexity of a thin rectangle at temperature 2 in 2D are not known to hold at temperature 1 in just-barely 3D. Motivated by this discrepancy, we establish new lower and upper bounds on the directed tile complexity of a thin rectangle at temperature 1 in just-barely 3D. We develop a new, more powerful type of Window Movie Lemma that lets us upper bound the number of "sufficiently similar" ways to assign glues to a set of fixed locations. Consequently, our lower bound, $Ω\left(N^{\frac{1}{k}}\right)$, is an asymptotic improvement over the previous best lower bound and is more aesthetically pleasing since it eliminates the $k$ that used to divide $N^{\frac{1}{k}}$. The proof of our upper bound is based on a just-barely 3D, temperature-1 counter, organized according to "digit regions", which affords it roughly fifty percent more digits for the same target rectangle compared to the previous best counter. This increase in digit density results in an upper bound of $O\left(N^{\frac{1}{\left\lfloor\frac{k}{2}\right\rfloor}}+\log N\right)$, that is an asymptotic improvement over the previous best upper bound and roughly the square of our lower bound.

preprint2015arXiv

Optimal self-assembly of finite shapes at temperature 1 in 3D

Working in a three-dimensional variant of Winfree's abstract Tile Assembly Model, we show that, for an arbitrary finite, connected shape $X \subset \mathbb{Z}^2$, there is a tile set that uniquely self-assembles into a 3D representation of a scaled-up version of $X$ at temperature 1 in 3D with optimal program-size complexity (the "program-size complexity", also known as "tile complexity", of a shape is the minimum number of tile types required to uniquely self-assemble it). Moreover, our construction is "just barely" 3D in the sense that it only places tiles in the $z = 0$ and $z = 1$ planes. Our result is essentially a just-barely 3D temperature 1 simulation of a similar 2D temperature 2 result by Soloveichik and Winfree (SICOMP 2007).

preprint2014arXiv

Optimal program-size complexity for self-assembly at temperature 1 in 3D

Working in a three-dimensional variant of Winfree's abstract Tile Assembly Model, we show that, for all $N \in \mathbb{N}$, there is a tile set that uniquely self-assembles into an $N \times N$ square shape at temperature 1 with optimal program-size complexity of $O(\log N / \log \log N)$ (the program-size complexity, also known as tile complexity, of a shape is the minimum number of unique tile types required to uniquely self-assemble it). Moreover, our construction is "just barely" 3D in the sense that it works even when the placement of tiles is restricted to the $z = 0$ and $z = 1$ planes. This result affirmatively answers an open question from Cook, Fu, Schweller (SODA 2011). To achieve this result, we develop a general 3D temperature 1 optimal encoding construction, reminiscent of the 2D temperature 2 optimal encoding construction of Soloveichik and Winfree (SICOMP 2007), and perhaps of independent interest.

preprint2014arXiv

Scaled pier fractals do not strictly self-assemble

A \emph{pier fractal} is a discrete self-similar fractal whose generator contains at least one \emph{pier}, that is, a member of the generator with exactly one adjacent point. Tree fractals and pinch-point fractals are special cases of pier fractals. In this paper, we study \emph{scaled pier fractals}, where a \emph{scaled fractal} is the shape obtained by replacing each point in the original fractal by a $c \times c$ block of points, for some $c \in \mathbb{Z}^+$. We prove that no scaled discrete self-similar pier fractal strictly self-assembles, at any temperature, in Winfree's abstract Tile Assembly Model.