<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<item>
  <id>05859663</id>
  <dt>a</dt>
  <an>05859663</an>
  <augroup>
    <au>Aloupis, Greg</au>
    <au>Collette, S\'ebastien</au>
    <au>Damian, Mirela</au>
    <au>Demaine, Erik D.</au>
    <au>El-Khechen, Dania</au>
    <au>Flatland, Robin</au>
    <au>Langerman, Stefan</au>
    <au>O'Rourke, Joseph</au>
    <au>Pinciu, Val</au>
    <au>Ramaswami, Suneeta</au>
    <au>Sacrist\'an, Vera</au>
    <au>Wuhrer, Stefanie</au>
  </augroup>
  <ti>Realistic reconfiguration of crystalline (and telecube) robots.</ti>
  <so>Chirikjian, Gregory S. (ed.) et al., Algorithmic foundations of robotics VIII. Selected contributions of the eighth international workshop on the algorithmic foundations of robotics (WAFR 2008), Guanajuato, M\'exico, December 7--9, 2008. Berlin: Springer (ISBN 978-3-642-00311-0/hbk978-3-642-00312-7/ebook). Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics 57, 433-447 (2010).</so>
  <py>2010</py>
  <pu>Berlin: Springer</pu>
  <lagroup>
    <la>EN</la>
  </lagroup>
  <ccgroup>
  </ccgroup>
  <utgroup>
  </utgroup>
  <cigroup>
  </cigroup>
  <ligroup>
    <li>doi:10.1007/978-3-642-00312-7_27</li>
  </ligroup>
  <abgroup>
    <ab>Summary: In this paper we propose novel algorithms for reconfiguring modular robots that are composed of $n$ atoms. Each atom has the shape of a unit cube and can expand/contract each face by half a unit, as well as attach to or detach from faces of neighboring atoms. For universal reconfiguration, atoms must be arranged in $2\times 2\times $2 modules. We respect certain physical constraints: each atom reaches at most unit velocity and (via expansion) can displace at most one other atom. We require that one of the atoms can store a map of the target configuration. Our algorithms involve a total of $O(n ^{2})$ such atom operations, which are performed in $O(n)$ parallel steps. This improves on previous reconfiguration algorithms, which either use $O(n ^{2})$ parallel steps or do not respect the constraints mentioned above. In fact, in the setting considered, our algorithms are optimal, in the sense that certain reconfigurations require $\Omega (n)$ parallel steps. A further advantage of our algorithms is that reconfiguration can take place within the union of the source and target configurations.</ab>
    <rv></rv>
  </abgroup>
</item>