0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views2 pages

Reversible Computing Theory Explained

The paper discusses the theory of reversible computing, which focuses on invertible primitives and composition rules that maintain invertibility, allowing for a closer alignment with physical laws. It highlights the potential to design sequential circuits with zero internal power dissipation, addressing heat dissipation issues in computing. The author proposes a conceptual model that bridges the gap between irreversible computing processes and the reversible nature of physical laws.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views2 pages

Reversible Computing Theory Explained

The paper discusses the theory of reversible computing, which focuses on invertible primitives and composition rules that maintain invertibility, allowing for a closer alignment with physical laws. It highlights the potential to design sequential circuits with zero internal power dissipation, addressing heat dissipation issues in computing. The author proposes a conceptual model that bridges the gap between irreversible computing processes and the reversible nature of physical laws.
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

REVERSIBLE COMPUTING

Tommaso Toffoli
MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
545 Technology Sq., Cambridge, MA 02139

Abstract. The theory of reversible computing is based on invertib|e primitives


and composition rules that preserve invertibility. With these constraints, one can still
satisfactorily deal with both functional and structural aspects of computing processes;
at the same time, one attains a closer correspondence between the behavior of abstract
computing systems and the microscopic physical laws (which are presumed to be
strictly reversible) that underly any concrete implementation of such systems.
According to a physical interpretation, the central result of this paper is that i¢
is ideally possible to build sequential c/rcuits with zero internal power dissipation.

L Introduction

This is an abridged version of a much longer report of the same title[27], to which
the reader may turn for further details, most proofs, and extended references. Here, the
numbering of formulas, figures, etc. reflects that of the original version.

Mathematical models of computation are abstract constructions, by their nature un-


fettered by physical laws. However, if these models are to give indications that are relevant
to concrete computing, they must somehow capture, albeit in a selective and stylized
way, certain general physical restrictions to which all concrete computing processes are
subjected.
O n e of the strongest motivations for the study of reversible computing comes from
the desire to reduce heat dissipation in computing machinery, and thus achieve higher
density and speed. Briefly, while the microscopic laws of physics are presumed to be
strictly reversible, abstract computing is usually thought of as an irreversible process,
since it m a y involve the evaluation of many-to-one functions. Thus, as one proceeds d o w n
from an abstract computing task to a formal realizationby means of a digital network and
finally to an implementation in a physical system, at some level of this modeling hierarchy
there must take place the transition from the irreversibilityof the given computing process
to the reversibility of the physical laws. In [Link] approach, this transition occurs
at a very low level and is hidden--so to speak--in the "physics" of the individual digital
gate;* as a consequence of this approach, the detailsof the work-to-heat conversion process
are put beyond the reach of the conceptual model of computation that is used.
O n the other hand, it is possible to formulate a more general conceptual model of
computation such that the gap between the irreversibilityof the desired behavior and the
reversibility of a given underlying mechanism is bridged in an explici~ way within the
model itself. This we shall do in the present paper.

~'~ypically, the computation is logically organized around computing primitives that are
not invertible, such as the N^NDgate; in turn, these are realized by physical devices which,
while by their nature obeying reversible microscopic laws, are made macroscopically irre-
versible by allowing them to convert some work to heat.
633

An important advantage of our approach is that any operations (such as the clearing
of a register) that in conventional logic lead to the destruction of macroscopic informa-
tion, and thus entail energy dissipation, here can be planned at the whole-circuit level
rather than at the gate level, and most of the time can be replaced by an information-
losstess variant. As a consequence, it appears possible to design circuits whose internal
power dissipation, under ideal physical circumstances, is zero. The power dissipation t h a t
would arise at the interface between such circuits and the outside world would be at most
proportional to the number of input/output lines, rather than to the number of logic gates.

2. Terminology and notation


A function 4: X - ~ Y is finite if X and Y are finite sets. A finite automaton is a
dynamical system characterized by a transition function of the form r : X X Q --~ Q X Y,
where r is finite. Without loss of generality, one may assume that such sets as X, Y, and
Q above be explicitly given as indexed Cartesian products of sets. We shall occasionally
call lines the individual variables associated with the individual factors of such products.
In what follows, we shall assume once and for all that all factors of the aforementioned
Cartesian products be identical copies of the Boolean set B ---~ (0,1). A finite function is
of order n if it has n input lines.
The process of generating multiple copies of a given signal must be treated with
particular care when reversibility is an' issue (moreover, from a physical viewpoint this
process is far from trivial). For this reason, in all that follows we shall restrict the meaning
of the term "function composition" to one-to-one composition, where any substitution of
o u t p u t variables for input variables is one-to-one. Thus, any "fan-out" node in a given
function-composition scheme will have to be treated as an explicit occurrence of a fan-
o u t function of the form (x) H (x,..., x). Intuitively, the responsibility for providing fan-
o u t is shifted from the composition rules to the computing primitives.
Abstract computers (such as finite automata and Turing machines) are essentially
function-composition schemes. It is customary to expJ'ess a function-composition scheme
in graphical form as a causality network. This is basically an acyclic directed graph in
which nodes correspond to functions and arcs to variables. By construction, causality
networks are "loop-free," i.e., they contain no cyclic paths. A combinational network is
a causality network that contains no infinite paths. Note that a finite causality network
is always a combinational one. With certain additional conventions (such as the use of
special markers called delay elements), causality networks having a particular iterative
structure can be represented more compactly as sequential networks.
A causality network is reversible if it is obtained by composition of invertible primi-
tives. Note that a reversible combinational network a|ways defines an invertible function.
Thus, in the case of combinational networks the structural aspect of "reversibility" and
the functional aspect of "invertibility" coincide. A sequential network is reversible if
its combinational part (i.e., the combinational network obtained by deleting the delay
elements and thus breaking the corresponding arcs) is reversible.
We shall assume familiarity with the concept of "realization" of finite functions and
a u t o m a t a by means of, respectively, combinational and sequential networks. In w h a t
follows, a "realization" will always mean a componentwise one; that is, to each input (or
output) line of a finite function there will correspond an input (or output) line in the
combinational network that realizes it, and similarly for the realization of a u t o m a t a b y
sequential networks.

Common questions

Powered by AI

Reversible computing proposes a conceptual model that explicitly accounts for the transition from the irreversibility of abstract computing processes to the reversibility of physical laws . This is achieved by formulating a more general model where the details of work-to-heat conversion are incorporated within the model itself, rather than hidden at the physical level. A unique advantage of this approach is that operations traditionally leading to energy dissipation, such as register clearing, can be addressed at the whole-circuit level, often allowing for their replacement by energy-efficient, lossless variants, thereby aiming for zero internal power dissipation under ideal conditions .

Reversible computing aligns with microscopic physical laws by using invertible primitives and composition rules that preserve invertibility, reflecting the reversible nature of these laws . This approach bridges the gap between the irreversibility of typical computational processes and the strict reversibility of microscopic laws, leading to the possibility of designing computing systems with ideally zero internal power dissipation. This reduction in energy dissipation arises because, under ideal conditions, reversible computing avoids the conversion of work to heat .

Causality networks are acyclic directed graphs used to express function-composition schemes, where nodes represent functions and arcs represent variables . A causality network is reversible if it is composed of invertible primitives . Combinational networks are causality networks without infinite paths and are always combinational if finite. Reversibility in combinational networks means that they define invertible functions . Sequential networks incorporate delay elements for compact representation of iterative structures, and are reversible if their combinational components, obtained by removing delay elements, are reversible .

Reversible computing addresses the energy dissipation from operations like register clearing by planning these operations at the circuit level rather than the gate level . This allows for the design of information-lossless variants, significantly reducing or eliminating energy dissipation under ideal conditions. Hence, rather than dissipating energy through traditional methods, reversible computing introduces circuit-level strategies that promote energy efficiency .

The one-to-one composition rule in function composition ensures that substitution of output variables for input variables is unambiguously reversible, which is crucial for maintaining the reversibility of causality networks . This requirement affects causality network design by necessitating explicit handling of signal fan-out through dedicated fan-out functions, rather than relying on composition rules alone . Such strict adherence to one-to-one mapping helps maintain the functional and structural reversibility required in reversible computing systems, ensuring that each step in computation can be inverted without loss of information.

In combinational networks within reversible computing, structural reversibility, which refers to the network's architecture, and functional reversibility, which pertains to the invertibility of the functions implemented, coincide . This means that a reversible combinational network inherently defines an invertible function, ensuring that each input uniquely determines an output and vice versa. This alignment is critical in reversible computing as it guarantees that any operation performed can be undone, supporting the theoretical framework for designing systems with ideally zero energy dissipation, by preventing information loss at each circuit level .

In reversible circuit design, the focus on internal power dissipation and the number of input/output lines instead of logic gates stems from the goal to minimize energy loss by maintaining reversibility at all stages . Reversible computing predicts that, ideally, circuits can operate with zero internal power dissipation by eliminating the need for energy dissipation traditionally incurred at the gate level . Consequently, any residual power dissipation is then confined to interactions between the circuit and the external environment, scaling with the circuit's interface complexity (i.e., the number of input/output lines) rather than the number of logic gates. This approach underscores the efficiency and scalability of reversible circuits in managing power dissipation.

Delay elements in causality networks allow for the compact representation of networks with iterative structures as sequential networks . These elements introduce controlled delays, enabling sequential logic that processes input signals in discrete steps. In terms of reversibility, a sequential network is considered reversible if its combinational part—obtained by removing delay elements—is reversible . This structure ensures that the system's temporal behavior does not compromise the invertibility of the overall function it implements, maintaining the integrity of reversible computing principles.

In reversible computing, finite automata are described as dynamical systems characterized by a transition function of the form r : X X Q → Q X Y, which is finite . This means that the system's behavior can be determined by the states it transitions between, as dictated by its transition function, which maps current states and inputs to new states and outputs. The finite nature of this transition function ensures that automata operate within a predictable and manageable scope, crucial for maintaining reversibility within computational systems .

In reversible computing, signal fan-out is treated as an explicit occurrence of a fan-out function, ensuring that each copy of a signal can be traced back to its original source, preserving reversibility . This contrasts with conventional computing, where fan-out is implicitly handled by the composition rules, often leading to irreversible processes. The implication of this approach is that it shifts responsibility for maintaining reversibility from the higher-level function composition rules to the fundamental computing primitives, ensuring that all operations in the computing model are inherently reversible and thus minimizing energy waste .

You might also like