Case record
The best packing known for 175 squares, side 13.76417431…, Ostashev 2026. Regularized by the Squares Project with Daniel's regularizer (evand/square-packing, MIT)
As published
The packing as published, Ostashev 2026 [Mishapolk KKT refinements 2026-10-14]

n=175

= corrects Nagamochi 2005open

13.23773920…≤s(175)≤13.76417431…

13.2313.764
131415
13.22914.229
nn+1

Proven

13.23773≤s(175)≤13.764175

  • exact

Citation record n-175

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

upperOstashev et al., GitHub (confirmed T-186)

Open

  • optimality

Bounds

Best known packing

13.76417431…

13.76417431748659663
Found by
Ostashev 2026
Improved by
PingYou Ltd, Polkovskyi
Construction
—
Source
[Mishapolk KKT refinements 2026-10-14]
Evidence
E-mishapolk-70a033f-certificate-report
Verified upper bound

13.76417431…

13.76417431748659663

The reported value, verified here.

Evidence
E-mishapolk-70a033f-exact-feasibility
Reported lower bound

13.30130208…

13.301302084963
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=175, k = 13 and interval 6 give a(175) = 13.301302084963725433530297926133..., 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

13.23773920…

13.2377392028
Corrects
Nagamochi 2005 (T-007)
Evidence
E-karakus-strip-lower, E-karakus-strip-measure-interval
Gap

0.52643511…

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-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-101 V3 C3 Daniel after Couzo, de Winter, Ellsworth, Levy · 2026-10-06 · 77 cases

    Exact certificates of 77 catalogue packings: s(n) ≤ S', 1.2e-16 to 9.8e-15 above each side

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

    Complete rational construction reports at 25 counts

  • T-130 V3 C3 Couzo after Xu, Daniel, Ellsworth, Levy · 2026-10-09 · 5 cases

    Five follow-up rational refinements from Couzo

  • T-138 V3 C3 Polkovskyi after Stenlund, Friedman, Ellsworth, Chaoweeraprasit, Couzo, Xu, Levy · 2026-10-10 · 16 cases

    Exact witnesses at Mishapolk's printed ceilings, the smallest known at 103 and 258 when registered

  • T-140 V3 C3 Couzo after Chaoweeraprasit, Polkovskyi, Xu, Daniel, Ellsworth, Levy · 2026-10-10 · 6 cases

    Six more exact rational certificates from Couzo

  • T-158 V3 C3 Ostashev after Nakajima, Ellsworth, Schadt, Friedman, de Winter, Daniel, Levy, Xu · 2026-10-12 · n = 175, 232, 264

    New packings of 175, 232 and 264 squares built on a new 38-square rectangle, each certified exactly

    Claim and records
    Claim
    Three complete rational source certificates by Ostashev, reported on jlevy/squares#528, prove finite upper bounds at the exact sides they state: s(175)≤27528348634973193258855646440084685651524191041221518308579027528348634973193258855646440084685651524191041221518308579/2000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, s(232)≤31528348634973193258895646440084685651524191041221518308579031528348634973193258895646440084685651524191041221518308579/2000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 and s(264)≤167747351323878328426102645873217709808239488409494842884223167747351323878328426102645873217709808239488409494842884223/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

    Each certificate gives a rational side and, for each unit square, a rational centre and the tangent of its half-angle, in the source's sqcert format: the 60-digit optimum of its packing with the load-bearing squares scaled by 1 + 1e-20, then every centre and the side dilated by 1 + 1e-60. Each side rounds up at 38 places to the side the issue prints and at 15 to the README's.

    The author reports that each packing passes his own C++ checker in GMP rational arithmetic, on the shipped certificates with no dilation and no tolerance and on certificates rebuilt from the 60-digit decimal packings, and an 80-digit mpmath cross-check written separately, all three written with AI assistance; he also states that each side is the exact first-order optimum of its packing's contact topology, with nonnegative KKT multipliers at a 60-digit solution. Those statements are the author's; no source program ran here.

    All nine retained jobs, the three positives with their duplicate-square and outside-container controls, were decided again here on 12 October 2026 by both maintained exact routes and equal their retained rows. A third exact route, half-extent containment and exact intersection area, decided the three with six controls each and held each retained file to its upstream bytes fetched at the pin. No route here is the source's code, and the source ran none of them, so the replay is independently re-implemented. The 12 October review found no blocking defect.

    Each side was below the ceiling its case held, by 2.95e-03 at 175 (Couzo's refinement of Xu's packing, T-140), 3.25e-03 at 232 (SQUISH's third request, T-136) and 3.44e-03 at 264 (the catalogue's 9 + 11 sqrt(2)/2, Goebel's pattern, verified by Daniel's exact ceiling, T-101, and at its exact side by T-155's regularized certificate of the same packing); at 175 it is also 2.94e-03 below Couzo's certificate of 11 October, which the issue names as the previous best and which the record holds in the issue-506 packet and registers as T-185, and 4.72e-03 below Xu's T-125. At all three counts it is the smallest exact side the record holds.

    On 12 October 2026 the case records adopted this entry as the house at all three counts, each case's reported and verified upper bounds moving together and each earlier house kept as history, with T-140, T-130, T-138 and T-125 verified and not selected at 175; private-worker custody was closed in the same change (packing/devtools/house-custody-2026-10-11.json).

    Credit Ostashev (https://github.com/dostashev/square-packing) with the three packings and their certificates. The issue says each is a composition: two library rectangles in opposite corners of the box with aligned squares around them, each using his new packing of 38 unit squares in an (h + 2) x h rectangle, h = 5.7641743..., found by a GPU soft-to-rigid search after Nakajima's idea; at 175 in place of the pieces of Ellsworth's s(171) template, cut from Schadt's s(50); at 232 beside a 76-square piece of Friedman's s(85); at 264 beside a 93-square piece of Daniel's exact optimum of de Winter's s(126); each then taken to the exact optimum of its contact topology. He asks that the pieces' sources be acknowledged as the record sees fit.

    Measured pose by pose, none of the three is a placement of the packing its case holds or of any report pending at its count: no symmetry of the box pairs the 175 square for square with T-140, with Couzo's certificate of 11 October or with T-125, the 232 with T-136, or the 264 with T-101's certificate. Where the record retains a named piece exactly, it reappears: 66 of the 171 squares of Daniel's certificate of Ellsworth's s(171) (T-101) land on squares of the 175 to the ninth decimal under a half turn, none turned, and 88 of the 126 of his exact optimum of de Winter's s(126) (T-098) on squares of the 264. Friedman's s(85) and the 38-square block are the author's statement, not measured.

    The issue states AI assistance: the author set up an AI-assisted research loop and drove it with his own ideas, the rectangle library and composition being his; AI agents wrote and ran the search, composition and verification code.
    Significance
    Three new packings, measured as no placement of the packings their cases hold or have pending, smaller finite construction sides at n=175, 232 and 264, 2.95e-03 to 3.44e-03 below the case ceilings and the smallest known at all three; no lower bound or optimum.
    Novelty
    previously-published Present in an identified source
    Records

    n = 175n = 232n = 264registerevidence 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

  • T-185 V3 C3 Couzo after Xu, Daniel, Ellsworth, Levy · 2026-10-15 · n = 175

    A tighter packing of 175 squares from Couzo, superseded by Ostashev's composition

    Claim and records
    Claim
    One complete rational source certificate reports a finite upper-bound improvement at the exact side it states: s(175)≤13.7671190241983642888907662905. The selected standing case is unchanged.

    The three retained jobs at 175, the certificate with its duplicate-square and outside-container controls, were decided again here on 16 October 2026 by both maintained exact routes and equal their retained rows, and the frozen comparison rebuilt equal. One maintained route is the verifier the source reports running; the independent rational corner checker is independently re-implemented, and the replay rests on it. The 16 October review found no blocking defect.

    It is the release's certificate at 175, first committed on 11 October 2026, which issue 506's release holds and the issue does not name; the author asked for it to be imported on issue 506 on 14 October 2026. When it was published it was below the case's ceiling, Xu's packing (T-125), by 1.78e-03, and below every other report at 175: T-140 (issue 488) by 1.70e-06, T-130, T-138 and the issue-476 certificate by 3.61e-05, and T-101 (issue 375) by 1.11e-02. Ostashev's issue 528 composition (T-158), the case's house since 12 October 2026, is 2.94e-03 below it, so the entry is superseded.

    Credit Couzo (https://github.com/franciscouzo/square-packing), after Xu: the source's standing table says the 175 was seeded from Xu. Measured here, it is the arrangement of his T-140 certificate, which started from Xu's packing, refined: every centre within 0.0113 of T-140's and 137 of 175 within 1e-3. By pose no symmetry pairs it, or T-140, with Xu's packing (T-125) one to one, at most 86 of its 175 squares lying within a tenth of Xu's (the 16 October review, RT-2). Issue 506 states that the search code and the request were written with Claude (Claude Code), directed and reviewed by the author.
    Significance
    A refinement of the author's own T-140 packing at n=175 to a new smallest side when published, 1.70e-06 below it and 1.78e-03 below the case ceiling then, as T-165 and T-167 are; not padding; no lower bound or optimum.
    Novelty
    previously-published Present in an identified source
    Records

    n = 175registerevidence 1evidence 2

  • T-186 V3 C3 Polkovskyi after Ostashev, Couzo, PingYou Ltd, Levy · 2026-10-15 · 12 cases

    Exact certificates at twelve counts from Polkovskyi, tightening the smallest reported there

  • T-193 V3 C3 Daniel after Xu, Chaoweeraprasit, Ostashev, Couzo, PingYou Ltd, Gupta, Polkovskyi, Levy · 2026-10-16 · 16 cases

    Exact algebraic sides at sixteen counts from Daniel, of packings the record credits

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 1 of the retained witness (witness id 2) translates 0.008347 along (1, 0) with the packing still valid, so the configuration admits a non-trivial feasible motion; 52 of its 175 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.

Regularized drawing

Regularized by the Squares Project with Daniel's regularizer (evand/square-packing, MIT), with the project's modifications: same-side exact re-solve (devtools.regularize_same_side). A drawing of T-186'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-174's packing (Polkovskyi after Ostashev, Couzo, PingYou Ltd, Levy), registered as T-186 for the upper bound its exact side proves.

Open questions
  • Priority: Earlier source ceiling 13.77817459305202 from [Kingbird]; full prior geometry and record remain retained in the packet. (Ellsworth)
  • Priority: Earlier house 13.7688992766137689 from [ry-xu square packing 2026], the case’s ceiling until 11 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Xu)
  • Priority: Earlier house 13.7671207246923133 from [Couzo certificates 2026-10-10], the case’s ceiling from 11 October 2026 until 12 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Xu, Couzo)
  • Priority: Earlier house 13.7641743174865967 from [Ostashev records 2026-10-12], the case’s ceiling from 12 October 2026 until 16 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Ostashev)

s(175) — open

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=175, k=13 and interval 6 give a(175)=13.301302084963725433530297926133…, so the reported lower bound here is now s(175)≥13.301302084963, rounded down, above Nagamochi’s closed form, 13.24744871391. 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, 16 October 2026. Polkovskyi’s tighter certificate, after PingYou Ltd’s, of Ostashev’s composition of two of his 38-square rectangles with Ellsworth’s n = 171 template, in place of its pieces of Schadt’s n = 50 packing (T-186) is now this case’s house: its exact certificate proves s(175)≤13.76417431748659663, 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 1.38×10−19. The earlier ceiling, displayed outward as 13.7641743174865967 from Ostashev’s packing (T-158), applied until this adoption and stays retained as history (the certificate).

House adoption, 12 October 2026. Ostashev’s composition of two of his 38-square rectangles with Ellsworth’s n = 171 template, in place of its pieces of Schadt’s n = 50 packing (T-158) was this case’s house until 16 October 2026: its exact certificate proves s(175)≤13.7641743174865967, the reported and the verified upper bound, 2.95×10−3 below the ceiling the case held until then, 13.7671207246923133 from Xu’s packing, improved by Couzo (T-140), which stays retained as history (the certificate).

House adoption, 11 October 2026. Couzo’s refinement of Xu’s packing (T-140) was this case’s house until 12 October 2026: its exact certificate proves s(175)≤13.7671207246923133, the reported and the verified upper bound, 1.78×10−3 below the ceiling the case held until then, 13.7688992766137689 from Xu’s packing (T-125), which stays retained as history (the certificate).

Exact certificate, 2026-10-06. Daniel’s square-packing published on 5 October 2026 an exact rational certificate of this packing, decided here over ℚ by two exact checkers that share no code with each other or with the source, and by the source’s own two run here: it previously proved s(175)≤13.77817459305203, the verified upper bound (T-101). Until then the verified upper bound was the trivial grid bound 14.

Open. Previously, the packing gave s(175)≤13.7781746, and the strongest lower bound independently verified here is 13.237739 from Karakuş’s general theorem, leaving a gap of 0.5404. General bound: s(N)≥1/2+N−⌊N⌋+1/4.

The earlier verified ceiling

The verified ceiling at that intake was 13.77817459305203, proved by Daniel’s exact rational certificate of this packing (E-evand-exact-ceilings-2026-10-05-exact-replay, T-101). It was larger than the then-reported 13.77817459305202, by 1×10−14.

It is not the value of s(175) and not a different packing: it is the certificate’s own side, 13.7781745930520227686…, rounded up at the fourteen decimals the catalogue prints. The catalogue gives the packing’s side exactly, as 6+(11/2)2, and the certificate’s side lies 1.4×10−19 above that: its squares are rational and each is kept clear of its neighbours and the walls, so it bounds the exact side from above and does not reach it. That side is irrational, so no rational certificate reaches it. That certificate gap was the upper-bound blocker at that intake. Read reported_upper_bound for the best known side length.

The exact certificate

Daniel’s square-packing published on 5 October 2026 exact rational certificates of the packings this register then listed as best known, solved from its own witnesses, and offered those that do not lower a printed side as a replay of the existing bounds, asking for nothing to be registered from them. The certificate for this count holds the same 175 squares, each a rational centre and a rational t=tan(θ/2), in a square of side 13.7781745930520227686…, 2.8×10−15 above the side the Kingbird catalogue prints, 13.77817459305202. Square for square, its pose lies within 1.8×10−15 of the binary64 pose the atlas then pictured for this count. Daniel’s solver moves the binary64 pose to a nearby exact KKT point of the problem of minimizing the side under non-overlap, computed at 80 digits, and rounds it outward to rationals.

This repository decides the certificate exactly. Converted without rounding, every pair and every wall is decided over ℚ twice, by sqpack’s exact separating-axis test and by an independent checker that shares no code with it, and the source’s own two checkers, run here as retained, accept it as well (receipts). That previously proved s(175)≤13.77817459305203, the verified upper bound at that intake: the certificate’s side rounded up at the fourteen decimals the catalogue prints, as the record writes any certificate of a printed side. It says nothing about optimality. On jlevy/squares#375 its author wrote that the solver, its checkers and the batch “were written with Claude (Anthropic) as a coding and research agent, directed and reviewed by me.”

The packing

Found by Ellsworth in 2024, via an unrecorded method.

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-mishapolk-70a033f-exact-feasibility replayed here independent V-sqpack-verify, V-check-rational-witness-independent (first-party); V-evand-arrangement-receipts, V-upper-bound-reports, V-evand-exact-certificates (first-party, premises)

The Xu construction

Xu reports (T-125) a construction at exact side 68844496383068844496383/5000000000000000000000, displayed upward as 13.7688992766137689. The pinned factual packet retains the entire source input and complete actual deciding outcomes.

The complete rational source certificate already includes the source’s stated dilation. No additional dilation or coordinate rounding is applied here.

Complete native replay, required full-roster controls and scoped independent review confirm finite feasibility at V3/C3. The source discloses LLM assistance. No global optimum, local-minimum theorem, rigidity or novelty is established. The source’s 191-touching-pair assertion for n51 is unconfirmed and is not admitted.

Francisco Couzo’s certificate (T-140)

Couzo’s refinement of Xu’s packing, reported on jlevy/squares#488, at exact side 860445045293269576081339809497/62500000000000000000000000000, displayed upward as 13.7671207246923133 (T-140). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 175 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. One maintained route is the verifier the source ran; the independent rational corner checker and the third route are independently re-implemented. The review of 10 October 2026 and the final review of 11 October 2026 accepted the replay for finite feasibility. That proves s(175)≤13.7671207246923133, the verified upper bound until 12 October 2026: confirmed, independently re-implemented. It says nothing about optimality, rigidity or a local minimum.

The author says the search code and the request were written with Claude under his direction.

The house it replaces, 13.7688992766137689 from Xu’s packing (T-125), stays retained with its own replay as history. The other certificates confirmed here at this count, T-130 at 13.7671551635425492 and T-138 at 13.767155163551, stay verified and are not selected.

Daniil Ostashev’s certificate (T-158)

Ostashev’s composition of two of his 38-square rectangles with Ellsworth’s n = 171 template, in place of its pieces of Schadt’s n = 50 packing, reported on jlevy/squares#528, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 13.7641743174865967 (T-158). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 175 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. No route here is the source’s code, so the replay is independently re-implemented. The review of 12 October 2026 accepted the replay for finite feasibility. That proves s(175)≤13.7641743174865967, the verified upper bound until 16 October 2026: confirmed, independently re-implemented. It says nothing about optimality, rigidity or a local minimum.

The issue says the author set up an AI-assisted research loop and drove it with his own ideas, the rectangle library and the composition being his, and that AI agents wrote and ran the search, composition and verification code.

The house it replaces, 13.7671207246923133 from Xu’s packing, improved by Couzo (T-140), stays retained with its own replay as history. The other certificates confirmed here at this count, T-130 at 13.7671551635425492, T-138 at 13.767155163551 and T-125 at 13.7688992766137689, stay verified and are not selected. T-174 at 13.7641743174865967, 1.38×10−19 below this house, 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.

Mykhailo Polkovskyi’s certificate (T-186)

Polkovskyi’s tighter certificate, after PingYou Ltd’s, of Ostashev’s composition of two of his 38-square rectangles with Ellsworth’s n = 171 template, in place of its pieces of Schadt’s n = 50 packing, reported in his repository on 14 October 2026, with no issue, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 13.76417431748659663 (T-186). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 175 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. No route here is the source’s code, so the replay is independently re-implemented. The review of 16 October 2026 accepted the replay for finite feasibility. That proves s(175)≤13.76417431748659663, the verified upper bound: confirmed, independently re-implemented. It says nothing about optimality, rigidity or a local minimum.

The certificate is Polkovskyi’s tightening of the packing T-174 records, measured here pose by pose as that packing (T-186’s regularizations), so the packing keeps its finder’s credit and Polkovskyi is credited with the certificate.

The commit makes no statement about AI assistance; the author’s issue 593 discloses Gemini assistance with solver scripting, precision checks and formatting.

The house it replaces, 13.7641743174865967 from Ostashev’s packing (T-158), stays retained with its own replay as history. The other certificates confirmed here at this count, T-174 at 13.7641743174865967, T-185 at 13.7671190241983643, T-140 at 13.7671207246923133, T-130 at 13.7671551635425492, T-138 at 13.767155163551 and T-125 at 13.7688992766137689, stay verified and are not selected. T-193’s exact algebraic side at this count, a root of a degree-7 integer polynomial 1.00×10−76 below this house, is confirmed here and accepted by the review of 16 October 2026. The owner’s house rule of 16 October 2026 adopts it: the case keeps this house until its adoption, staged under think-ot5c, moves it to T-193’s side, once the writer takes an algebraic side.