  Algorithmic self-assembly occurs when disorganized components autonomously
combine to form structures and, by their design and the dynamics of the system,
are forced to follow the execution of algorithms. Motivated by applications in
DNA-nanotechnology, investigations in algorithmic tile-based self-assembly have
blossomed into a mature theory with research leveraging tools from
computability theory, complexity theory, information theory, and graph theory
to develop a wide range of models and show that many are computationally
universal, while also exposing powers and limitations of each. Beyond
computational universality, the abstract Tile Assembly Model (aTAM) was shown
to be intrinsically universal (IU), a strong notion of completeness where a
single tile set is capable of simulating all systems within the model; however,
this result required non-deterministic tile attachments. This was later
confirmed necessary when it was shown that the class of directed aTAM systems
is not IU. Building on these results to further investigate the impacts of
other dynamics, Hader et al. examined several tile-assembly models which varied
across (1) the numbers of dimensions used, (2) restrictions based on diffusion
of tiles through space, and (3) whether each system is directed, and showed
which models are IU. Such results have shed much light on the roles of various
aspects of the dynamics of tile-assembly and their effects on the intrinsic
universality of each model. Here we provide direct comparisons of the various
models by considering intrinsic simulations between models. We show that in
some cases one model is more powerful than another, and in others, pairs of
models have mutually exclusive capabilities. This comparison helps to expose
the impacts of these three important aspects and further helps define a
hierarchy of tile-assembly models.
