  We propose a four-way classification of two-dimensional semi-totalistic
cellular automata that is different than Wolfram's, based on two questions with
yes-or-no answers: do there exist patterns that eventually escape any finite
bounding box placed around them? And do there exist patterns that die out
completely? If both of these conditions are true, then a cellular automaton
rule is likely to support spaceships, small patterns that move and that form
the building blocks of many of the more complex patterns that are known for
Life. If one or both of these conditions is not true, then there may still be
phenomena of interest supported by the given cellular automaton rule, but we
will have to look harder for them. Although our classification is very crude,
we argue that it is more objective than Wolfram's (due to the greater ease of
determining a rigorous answer to these questions), more predictive (as we can
classify large groups of rules without observing them individually), and more
accurate in focusing attention on rules likely to support patterns with complex
behavior. We support these assertions by surveying a number of known cellular
automaton rules.
