Flat origami is Turing Complete

TL;DR

This paper demonstrates that flat origami can simulate any Turing machine, showing its computational universality by encoding cellular automata within crease patterns.

Contribution

It proves that flat origami, with optional creases, is Turing complete, establishing its computational universality and complexity.

Findings

Flat origami can simulate Rule 110 cellular automaton.

Determining valid crease patterns is NP-complete.

Flat origami is P-complete as a computational device.

Abstract

"Flat origami" refers to the folding of flat, zero-curvature paper such that the finished object lies in a plane. Mathematically, flat origami consists of a continuous, piecewise isometric map $f:P\subseteq\mathbb{R}^2\to\mathbb{R}^2$ along with a layer ordering $\lambda_f:P\times P\to \{-1,1\}$ that tracks which points of $P$ are above/below others when folded. The set of crease lines that a flat origami makes (i.e., the set on which the mapping $f$ is non-differentiable) is called its "crease pattern." Flat origami mappings and their layer orderings can possess surprisingly intricate structure. For instance, determining whether or not a given straight-line planar graph drawn on $P$ is the crease pattern for some flat origami has been shown to be an NP-complete problem, and this result from 1996 led to numerous explorations in computational aspects of flat origami. In this paper we prove that flat origami, when viewed as a computational device, is Turing complete, or more specifically P-complete. We do this by showing that flat origami crease patterns with "optional creases" (creases that might be folded or remain unfolded depending on constraints imposed by other creases or inputs) can be constructed to simulate Rule 110, a one-dimensional cellular automaton that was proven to be Turing complete by Matthew Cook in 2004.