  Is Winfree's abstract Tile Assembly Model (aTAM) "powerful?" Well, if certain
tiles are required to "cooperate" in order to be able to bind to a growing tile
assembly (a.k.a., temperature 2 self-assembly), then Turing universal
computation and the efficient self-assembly of $N \times N$ squares is
achievable in the aTAM (Rotemund and Winfree, STOC 2000). So yes, in a
computational sense, the aTAM is quite powerful! However, if one completely
removes this cooperativity condition (a.k.a., temperature 1 self-assembly),
then the computational "power" of the aTAM (i.e., its ability to support Turing
universal computation and the efficient self-assembly of $N \times N$ squares)
becomes unknown. On the plus side, the aTAM, at temperature 1, isn't only
Turing universal but also supports the efficient self-assembly $N \times N$
squares if self-assembly is allowed to utilize three spatial dimensions (Fu,
Schweller and Cook, SODA 2011). We investigate the theoretical "power" of a
seemingly simple, restrictive class of tile assembly systems (TASs) in which
(1) the absolute value of every glue strength is 1, (2) there's a single
negative strength glue type and (3) unequal glues can't interact. We call these
the \emph{restricted glue} TASs (rgTAS). We first show the tile complexity of
producing an $N \times N$ square with an rgTAS is $O(\frac{\log n}{\log \log
n})$. We also prove that rgTASs are Turing universal with a construction that
simulates an arbitrary Turing machine. Next, we provide results for a variation
of the rgTAS class, partially restricted glue TASs, which is similar except
that the magnitude of the negative glue's strength can only assumed to be $\ge
1$. These results consist of a construction with $O(\log n)$ tile complexity
for building $N \times N$ squares, and one which simulates a Turing machine but
with a greater scaling factor than for the rgTAS construction.
