Top Banner
1 case-14Oct2011 And now for something completely different.
68

case-14Oct2011

Jan 08, 2016

Download

Documents

l_a_l_a

And now for something c ompletely different. case-14Oct2011. Andrew W. Eckford Department of Computer Science and Engineering, York University Joint work with: L . Cui, York University P . Thomas and R. Snyder, Case Western Reserve University. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: case-14Oct2011

1

case-14Oct2011And now for somethingcompletely different.

Page 2: case-14Oct2011

Models and Capacitiesof Molecular Communication

Andrew W. EckfordDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, York University

Joint work with: L. Cui, York University P. Thomas and R. Snyder, Case Western Reserve University

Page 3: case-14Oct2011

3

How do these things talk?

Page 4: case-14Oct2011

4

Why do this? … Engineering

Page 5: case-14Oct2011

5

Why do this? … Medicine/Biology

Model and calculate capacity of a molecular communication channel

Show that information theory can predict biological parameters

Show that information theory plays an important role in physiology/medicine

Page 6: case-14Oct2011

6

Communication Model

Communications model

Tx Rx

1, 2, 3, ..., |M|M:

m

Tx

m

Noise

m'

m = m'?

Medium

Page 7: case-14Oct2011

7

Communication Model

Fundamental assumptions

1. Molecules propagate via Brownian motion

2. Molecules don’t interact with each other (no reaction, motions are independent)

3. Molecules don’t disappear or change identity

Page 8: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Identity: Sending 0

Release type A

Page 9: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Identity: Sending 1

Release type B

Page 10: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Identity: Receiving

Measure identity of arrivals

Page 11: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Quantity: Sending 0

Release no molecules

Page 12: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Quantity: Sending 1

Release lots of molecules

Page 13: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Quantity: Receiving

Measure number arriving

Page 14: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Timing: Sending 0

Release a molecule now

Page 15: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Timing: Sending 1

WAIT …

Page 16: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Timing: Sending 1

Release at time T>0

Page 17: case-14Oct2011

Say it with Molecules

Cell 1 Cell 2

Timing: Receiving

Measure arrival time

Page 18: case-14Oct2011

Ideal System Model

“All models are wrong,but some are useful”

-- George Box

Page 19: case-14Oct2011

19

Ideal System Model

In an ideal system:

Page 20: case-14Oct2011

20

Ideal System Model

In an ideal system:

1) Transmitter and receiver are perfectly synchronized.

Page 21: case-14Oct2011

21

Ideal System Model

In an ideal system:

1) Transmitter and receiver are perfectly synchronized.

2) Transmitter perfectly controls the release times and physical state of transmitted particles.

Page 22: case-14Oct2011

22

Ideal System Model

In an ideal system:

1) Transmitter and receiver are perfectly synchronized.

2) Transmitter perfectly controls the release times and physical state of transmitted particles.

3) Receiver perfectly measures the arrival time and physical state of any particle that crosses the boundary.

Page 23: case-14Oct2011

23

Ideal System Model

In an ideal system:

1) Transmitter and receiver are perfectly synchronized.

2) Transmitter perfectly controls the release times and physical state of transmitted particles.

3) Receiver perfectly measures the arrival time and physical state of any particle that crosses the boundary.

4) Receiver immediately absorbs (i.e., removes from the system) any particle that crosses the boundary.

Page 24: case-14Oct2011

24

Ideal System Model

In an ideal system:

1) Transmitter and receiver are perfectly synchronized.

2) Transmitter perfectly controls the release times and physical state of transmitted particles.

3) Receiver perfectly measures the arrival time and physical state of any particle that crosses the boundary.

4) Receiver immediately absorbs (i.e., removes from the system) any particle that crosses the boundary.

Everyt

hing i

s perf

ect

Page 25: case-14Oct2011

25

Ideal System Model

Tx

Rx

d0

Two-dimensional Brownian motion

Page 26: case-14Oct2011

26

Ideal System Model

Tx

Rx

d0

Two-dimensional Brownian motion

Page 27: case-14Oct2011

27

Ideal System Model

Tx

Rx

d0

Two-dimensional Brownian motion

Uncertainty in propagation is the main source of noise!

Page 28: case-14Oct2011

28

Ideal System Model

Theorem.

I(X;Y) is higher under the ideal system model than under any system model that abandons any of these assumptions.

Page 29: case-14Oct2011

29

Ideal System Model

Theorem.

I(X;Y) is higher under the ideal system model than under any system model that abandons any of these assumptions.

Proof.

1, 2, 3: Obvious property of degraded channels.

4: ... a property of Brownian motion.

Page 30: case-14Oct2011

30

Ideal System Model

Tx

Rx

d0

Two-dimensional Brownian motion

Page 31: case-14Oct2011

31

Ideal System Model

Tx

Rx

d0

One-dimensional Brownian motion

Page 32: case-14Oct2011

32

Ideal System Model

Tx

Rx

d0

Two-dimensional Brownian motion

Page 33: case-14Oct2011

33

Ideal System Model

Two-dimensional Brownian motion

Tx

Rx

d0

Page 34: case-14Oct2011

34

Ideal System Model

Two-dimensional Brownian motion

Tx

Rx

d0

First hitting time is the only property ofBrownian motion that we use.

Page 35: case-14Oct2011

35

Input-output relationship

Additive Noise: y = x + n

n = First arrival time

fN(n) = First arrival time PDF

fN(y-x) = Arrival at time y given release at time x

Page 36: case-14Oct2011

36

Input-output relationship

Page 37: case-14Oct2011

37

Input-output relationship

Bapat-Beg theorem

Page 38: case-14Oct2011

38

Delay Selector Channel

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Page 39: case-14Oct2011

39

Delay Selector Channel

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Delay: 1

Page 40: case-14Oct2011

40

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Delay: 1

Receive: 0 1 0 0 0 0 00 0 0

Delay Selector Channel

Page 41: case-14Oct2011

41

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Delay: 1

Receive: 0 1 0 0 1 0 00 0 0

Delay Selector Channel

Page 42: case-14Oct2011

42

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Delay: 1

Receive: 0 1 0 0 2 0 00 0 0

Delay Selector Channel

Page 43: case-14Oct2011

43

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Delay:1

Receive: 0 1 0 0 2 0 01 0 0

Delay Selector Channel

Page 44: case-14Oct2011

44

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Delay:1

Receive: 0 1 0 0 2 0 01 1 0

Delay Selector Channel

Page 45: case-14Oct2011

45

Transmit: 1 0 1 1 0 1 00 1 0

Delay:

Receive: 0 1 0 0 2 0 01 1 0

Delay Selector Channel

Page 46: case-14Oct2011

46

I

Receive: 0 1 0 0 2 0 01 1 0

Delay Selector Channel

Page 47: case-14Oct2011

47

I

Receive: 0 1 0 0 2 0 01 1 0

… Transmit = ?

Delay Selector Channel

Page 48: case-14Oct2011

Delay Selector Channel

Page 49: case-14Oct2011

Delay Selector Channel

Page 50: case-14Oct2011

50

Delay Selector Channel

Page 51: case-14Oct2011

51

Delay Selector Channel

Page 52: case-14Oct2011

52

Delay Selector Channel

[Cui, Eckford, CWIT 2011]

Page 53: case-14Oct2011

Delay Selector Channel

Page 54: case-14Oct2011

Delay Selector Channel

Max over px

Page 55: case-14Oct2011

Delay Selector Channel

Page 56: case-14Oct2011

56

Delay Selector Channel

Let m = 1, q1 = 0.5:

Page 57: case-14Oct2011

57

Delay Selector Channel

Let m = 1, q1 = 0.5:

Page 58: case-14Oct2011

58

Delay Selector Channel

Let m = 1, q1 = 0.5:

Page 59: case-14Oct2011

59

Ligand-receptor channels

Page 60: case-14Oct2011

60

Ligand-receptor channels

X = concentration (H/L)

Y = binding state (B/U)

Cell

Page 61: case-14Oct2011

61

Ligand-receptor channels

Cell

Page 62: case-14Oct2011

62

Ligand-receptor channels

Cell

Page 63: case-14Oct2011

63

Ligand-receptor channels

Cell

Page 64: case-14Oct2011

64

Ligand-receptor channels

Page 65: case-14Oct2011

65

Ligand-receptor channels

Theorem:

If αL = 0, αH = 1, β = 1, capacity is log2 ϕ = 0.6942.

Proof sketch:

“BB” subsequences are forbidden at the receiver.

Furthermore, the transmitter always knows the binding state.

[Thomas, Snyder, Eckford, ISIT 2012, in prep]

Page 66: case-14Oct2011

66

Ligand-receptor channels

Conjecture:

In general, feedback-capacity-achieving input distribution is iid.

[Thomas, Snyder, Eckford, ISIT 2012, in prep]

Page 67: case-14Oct2011

67

For more information

http://molecularcommunication.ca

Page 68: case-14Oct2011

68

For more information

Acknowledgments

Lu Cui York Univ., Canada

Peter Thomas, Robin Snyder Case Western Reserve Univ., USA

Research funding from NSERC

Contact

Email: [email protected]: http://www.andreweckford.com/Twitter: @andreweckford