Case record
The best packing known for 130 squares, side 11.90448303…, Chaoweeraprasit 2026

n=130

= corrects Nagamochi 2005open

11.42016483…≤s(130)≤11.90448303…

11.4211.904
111213
11.40212.402
nn+1

Proven

11.42016≤s(130)≤11.904484

  • exact

Citation record n-130

lowerKarakuş 2026, arXiv corrects Nagamochi 2005 (confirmed T-083)

upperChaoweeraprasit et al., GitHub (confirmed T-174)

Open

  • optimality

Bounds

Best known packing

11.90448303…

11.90448303251578644
Found by
Chaoweeraprasit 2026
Improved by
Gupta, PingYou Ltd
Construction
—
Source
[PingYou PR 574 certificates 2026-10-13]
Evidence
E-pingyou-574-certificate-report
Verified upper bound

11.90448303…

11.90448303251578644

The reported value, verified here.

Evidence
E-pingyou-574-exact-feasibility
Reported lower bound

11.48554056…

11.485540560656
Proved by
Hosono 2026
Kind
counting
Scope
Unrestricted unit-square packing with independent rotations and disjoint interiors.
Note
Hosono's closed form (wand125, 13 October 2026, T-180): s(N) >= a(N) for every non-square N >= 49, from a measure of line segments on 34 intervals of the fractional part. At n=130, k = 11 and interval 24 give a(130) = 11.485540560656512573001434419806..., here rounded down at 12 and 30 places. The source replayed its certificate with its own checker; no replay has run here.
Source
[wand125 closed form 2026-10-14]
Evidence
E-wand125-closed-form-report
Verified lower bound

11.42016483…

11.4201648339
Corrects
Nagamochi 2005 (T-007)
Evidence
E-karakus-strip-lower, E-karakus-strip-measure-interval
Gap

0.48431819…

Verified upper minus verified lower.

Results in the register

  • T-007 V0 C1 Nagamochi · 2026-08-31 · 321 cases

    s(n)≥min(⌈n⌉,n−2⌊n⌋+1+1) for 4≤n≤324

  • T-056 V3 C3 Couzo · 2026-09-29 · 49 cases

    Smaller packings for 49 counts from n=68 to 307, each certified two independent ways

  • T-083 V3 C3 Karakuş · 2026-10-02 · 301 cases

    s(n)≥1/2+n−⌊n⌋+1/4 for every nonsquare 8≤n≤324

  • T-085 V3 C3 Karakuş; Vlasenko · 2026-10-02 · 315 cases

    Nagamochi 2005, Lemma 1 is false for every container with a>3 and b>2

  • T-113 V3 C3 Chaoweeraprasit after Ellsworth · 2026-10-07 · 10 cases

    s(n)≤Sn at ten counts, n=108 to 303, from new SQUISH rational packings

  • T-125 V3 C3 Xu · 2026-10-08 · 25 cases

    Complete rational construction reports at 25 counts

  • T-127 V3 C3 Gupta after Chaoweeraprasit, Daniel · 2026-10-08 · 17 cases

    Fourteen rational refinements, seventeen complete source cases

  • T-129 V0 C0 Daniel after Couzo, Levy · 2026-10-08 · n = 105, 130, 292

    Three dated Daniel certificate reports with historical source custody

    Claim and records
    Claim
    Complete author certificate reports at 105, 130 and 292 are retained with matching inputs and separate immutable pins, at the exact sides they state: s(105)≤10.806077865519704632682966129102, s(130)≤11.911187706535762355657987890878 and s(292)≤17.597249391156465040647414499422. All three exact sides are superseded by smaller currently verified bounds; selected cases and original T-098/T-101 assurance are unchanged.
    Significance
    Historical certificate custody without a current frontier improvement.
    Novelty
    previously-published Present in an identified source
    Records

    n = 105n = 130n = 292registerevidence 1evidence 2

  • T-174 V3 C3 PingYou Ltd after Friedman, Ellsworth, Daniel, Xu, Barnett, Couzo, Ostashev, Chaoweeraprasit, Gupta, Fang, Polkovskyi, Levy · 2026-10-14 · 68 cases

    Tighter certificates at 68 counts from PingYou Ltd, of others' packings and its own

  • T-180 V0 C1 Hosono · 2026-10-14 · 264 cases

    Closed-form lower bound s(N)≥a(N) for every non-square N≥49, reported

Verification

upper: replayed here; lower: external proof (read here), audited here

formal lower differs from report

Rigidity

not rigid, numerically checked, numerical multiprecision

Evidence: E-translation-escape-not-rigid

Scope

Square 91 of the retained witness (witness id 92) translates 0.002874 along (-0.985468, 0.169861) with the packing still valid, so the configuration admits a non-trivial feasible motion; 2 of its 130 squares do. Every constraint is exactly affine in the slide parameter, so the arithmetic carries no linearization error, but the coordinates are the witness's own finite-precision transcription: this settles the retained configuration, not the true optimum. Rigidity and optimality are independent, and this bears only on the former.

Regularization

Drawn as published: the layer's regularized view does not improve on the packing as published (it ties the house drawing on every goal of the improvement rule), so the house drawing is drawn (regularization policy, section 12). The view was regularized by the Squares Project with its own axis tool (regularize_axis_components/2). A drawing of T-174's packing at the witness's own side: a pure regularization, which proves no new bound, so not a result. The house is itself its source's regularization of T-127's packing (PingYou Ltd after Friedman, Ellsworth, Daniel, Xu, Barnett, Couzo, Ostashev, Chaoweeraprasit, Gupta, Fang, Polkovskyi, Levy), registered as T-174 for the upper bound its exact side proves.

Open questions
  • Priority: Earlier source ceiling 11.9044830325168772 from [SQUISH ten packings 2026-10-07]; the complete original frontier and house remain retained in the packet. (Chaoweeraprasit)
  • Priority: Earlier house 11.9044830325157865 from [Gupta rational refinements 2026-10-08], the case’s ceiling until 17 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Chaoweeraprasit (itsnaka), Gupta)

s(130) — Square Packing Case

Hosono’s closed form, 14 October 2026. Hosono’s closed form (wand125, 13 October 2026, T-180) states s(N)≥a(N) for every non-square N≥49, from a measure of line segments on 34 intervals of the fractional part. At n=130, k=11 and interval 24 give a(130)=11.485540560656512573001434419806…, so the reported lower bound here is now s(130)≥11.485540560656, rounded down, above Nagamochi’s closed form, 11.44030650891. The source replayed its certificate with its own checker; no record of it has been replayed here, so the verified lower bound is unchanged. The source states that its search, certificates, checkers and text were produced with AI assistance (Claude and Codex), under the direction of and reviewed by Hosono.

House adoption, 17 October 2026. PingYou Ltd’s refinement of Gupta’s refinement of Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing (T-174) is now this case’s house: its exact certificate proves s(130)≤11.90448303251578644, the reported and the verified upper bound, rounded outward from its exact side. The exact certificate side improves the previous verified exact side by about 1.19×10−19. The earlier ceiling, displayed outward as 11.9044830325157865 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing, improved by Gupta (T-127), applied until this adoption and stays retained as history (the certificate).

Held for the owner, 15 October 2026; lifted 16 October 2026. T-174 at 11.9044830325157865, 1.19×10−19 below this case’s verified ceiling, is confirmed here and accepted by the review of 14 October 2026. From 15 October 2026 until the owner’s house rule of 16 October 2026 lifted the hold, PR #574’s houses were held for the owner, since their witnesses would add about 18.5 MB to a checkout and their custody inputs about 5.8 MB to every worker’s snapshot.

The Upper Bound

Previously, Chaoweeraprasit (itsnaka), using SQUISH, reports s(130)≤Sn, with Sn=6701628168660175562949953421312 in SQUISH’s ten-packing release. The certificate gives rational centres and half-angle parameters for 130 unit squares. The source’s original finite decimal display is 11.9044830325168771; the rational fraction states the claimed bound exactly.

The new packing improves the earlier reported side 11.911187706548755 from [franciscouzo square-packing 2026-09-27]. This repository confirmed the upper bound by independently re-implemented exact-rational checks: native exact_verify and devtools.check_rational_witness_independent accept every pair and wall of the new packing and reject both geometric controls. The verified display is 11.9044830325168772, the exact source side rounded upward at sixteen decimals. Both accepted reviews cover the shared half-angle conversion and the complete roster. The submitted certificates establish feasible upper bounds and make no optimality or rigidity claim. Separately, this repository’s numerical translation screen finds a nontrivial feasible motion in the retained configuration. That numerical assessment concerns this configuration alone; it does not settle the optimum or all packings at this side.

The author credits Ellsworth’s records and tools and states that SQUISH’s solver, verification and issue were written with Claude Opus 5.5 under his direction, management, review and steering. The source packet retains derived packing facts and source metadata.

Earlier Packing

Couzo found the earlier packing. Its reported side was 11.911187706548755. The earlier certified ceiling 11.911187706548756 was the verified upper bound before the SQUISH certificate (T-056), supported by Couzo’s packet. This repository certified that packing by exact rational and interval checks; the packet records their implementations and receipts. Any optimality or rigidity observations about that packing concern its own pose.

The lower bound

The strongest lower bound independently verified in this record is Karakuş’s general bound, which applies to every nonsquare N≥8:

s(N)≥12+N−⌊N⌋+14

Correction, 2 October 2026. Until that date the verified lower bound here was Nagamochi’s general closed form, s(N)≥min(⌈N⌉,N−2⌊N⌋+1+1), which is stronger at this n and is now recorded as a reported bound. Its published proof rests on Nagamochi’s Lemma 1, which Karakuş showed false; nothing is disproved, and no packing beating it is known (review of 2 October 2026). This register had recorded that proof as verified, its own error, logged as defect D-516.

Source-reported bounds are recorded separately from this independently verified theorem.

Verification Code

The programs behind this case’s verified bounds, by their evidence. The code column says how the code that ran stands to the code its producer used. VERIFIERS.md says what each program is and whose it is.

bound evidence run code programs
verified lower E-karakus-strip-lower a published proof no code no verification code
verified lower E-karakus-strip-measure-interval audited here independent V-check-karakus-strip-measure (first-party)
verified upper E-pingyou-574-exact-feasibility replayed here independent V-sqpack-verify, V-check-rational-witness-independent, V-check-half-angle-area (first-party); V-evand-arrangement-receipts, V-upper-bound-reports, V-evand-exact-certificates (first-party, premises)

The Gupta precision refinement

Gupta refines the earlier SQUISH construction at exact rational side 11904483032515786440073379383431/1000000000000000000000000000000, displayed upward as 11.9044830325157865 (T-127). The complete factual packet retains every original certificate, complete comparator and actual deciding outcome for all seventeen source cases, including three withdrawals.

Complete dual-route native replay, full-roster controls and separately prompted source and production review confirm finite feasibility at V3/C3 using independently re-implemented deciding code. The repository routes share parsing, half-angle conversion, Fraction arithmetic and SAT methodology; the recorded code relation is to the source producer’s verification, not to each other. The full source poses are converted without dilation or rounding. The source credits Chaoweeraprasit for SQUISH and Daniel for the optimizer. No author program is executed here. Feasibility establishes no optimizer, local-minimum, rigidity, novelty, priority, global-optimality, formal proof or human-oversight assurance.

PingYou Ltd’s certificate (T-174)

PingYou Ltd’s refinement of Gupta’s refinement of Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing, reported in pull request #574, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 11.90448303251578644 (T-174). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 130 unit squares, a rational centre and the tangent of its half-angle; the retained packet holds it with the complete native jobs that decided it.

Both maintained exact routes decided it here, sqpack’s exact separating-axis verifier and the independent rational corner checker, with its duplicate-square and outside-container controls, and a third exact route, half-extent containment and exact intersection area, decided it again. The source ran both maintained routes itself on its corners witnesses; those runs are its own, and the replay here is independently re-implemented. The review of 14 October 2026 accepted the replay for finite feasibility. That proves s(130)≤11.90448303251578644, the verified upper bound: confirmed, independently re-implemented. It says nothing about optimality, rigidity or a local minimum.

The certificate is PingYou Ltd’s tightening of the packing T-127 records, that packing by the source’s statement, not decided here (T-174’s regularizations), so the packing keeps its finder’s credit and PingYou Ltd is credited with the certificate.

The source makes no statement about AI assistance in this pull request; for its #503 and #504 certificates the author said on 12 October 2026 that they were AI assisted by ‘PY’, an unreleased agentic AI offering by PingYou Ltd.

The house it replaces, 11.9044830325157865 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing, improved by Gupta (T-127), stays retained with its own replay as history. The other certificates confirmed here at this count, T-113 at 11.9044830325168772 and T-125 at 11.9086935692119087, stay verified and are not selected.