Case record
The best packing known for 232 squares, side 15.76417431…, 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=232

= corrects Nagamochi 2005open

15.23940297…≤s(232)≤15.76417431…

15.2315.764
151617
15.23216.232
nn+1

Proven

15.23940≤s(232)≤15.764175

  • exact

Citation record n-232

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

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

Open

  • optimality

Bounds

Best known packing

15.76417431…

15.76417431748659663
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

15.76417431…

15.76417431748659663

The reported value, verified here.

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

15.29310997…

15.293109978103
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=232, k = 15 and interval 6 give a(232) = 15.293109978103125446064557336514..., 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

15.23940297…

15.2394029729
Corrects
Nagamochi 2005 (T-007)
Evidence
E-karakus-strip-lower, E-karakus-strip-measure-interval
Gap

0.52477134…

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-136 V3 C3 Chaoweeraprasit after Couzo, Xu, Göbel, Schadt, Ellsworth, Hajba, Levy · 2026-10-10 · 17 cases

    Seventeen exact rational packings from SQUISH's third request

  • 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-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 0.008488 along (0, 1) with the packing still valid, so the configuration admits a non-trivial feasible motion; 120 of its 232 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: port of his coincidence placement (regularize_grid_slack/1) rather than his code, 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 house 15.77817459305202 from [Kingbird], the case’s ceiling until 11 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained.
  • Priority: Earlier house 15.7674283499418417 from [SQUISH third request 2026-10-09], the case’s ceiling from 11 October 2026 until 12 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Chaoweeraprasit (itsnaka))
  • Priority: Earlier house 15.7641743174865967 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(232) — 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=232, k=15 and interval 6 give a(232)=15.293109978103125446064557336514…, so the reported lower bound here is now s(232)≥15.293109978103, rounded down, above Nagamochi’s closed form, 15.24780684877. 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 refinement, after PingYou Ltd’s, of Ostashev’s composition of his 38-square rectangle with a 76-square piece of Friedman’s n = 85 packing (T-186) is now this case’s house: its exact certificate proves s(232)≤15.76417431748659663, 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 1.58×10−19. The earlier ceiling, displayed outward as 15.7641743174865967 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 his 38-square rectangle with a 76-square piece of Friedman’s n = 85 packing (T-158) was this case’s house until 16 October 2026: its exact certificate proves s(232)≤15.7641743174865967, the reported and the verified upper bound, 3.25×10−3 below the ceiling the case held until then, 15.7674283499418417 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing (T-136), which stays retained as history (the certificate).

House adoption, 11 October 2026. Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing (T-136) was this case’s house until 12 October 2026: its exact certificate proves s(232)≤15.7674283499418417, the reported and the verified upper bound, 1.07×10−2 below the ceiling the case held until then, 15.77817459305202 from the catalogue’s packing (T-101), 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 proved s(232)≤15.77817459305203, the verified upper bound until 11 October 2026 (T-101). Until then the verified upper bound was the trivial grid bound 16.

Open. Previously, the best known packing gave s(232)≤15.7781746, and the strongest lower bound independently verified here is 15.239402 from Karakuş’s general theorem, leaving a gap of 0.5388. General bound: s(N)≥1/2+N−⌊N⌋+1/4.

The earlier verified ceiling

Until 11 October 2026 the verified upper bound here was 15.77817459305203, 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 catalogue’s printed side 15.77817459305202, then the best known, by 1×10−14.

It was not the value of s(232) and not a different packing: it is the certificate’s own side, 15.7781745930520227686…, rounded up at the fourteen decimals the catalogue prints. The catalogue gives the packing’s side exactly, as 8+(11/2)2, and the certificate’s side lies 1.6×10−19 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. A mathematics blocker in the frontmatter recorded the difference until Chaoweeraprasit’s certificate (T-136) replaced both lanes.

The exact certificate

Daniel’s square-packing published on 5 October 2026 exact rational certificates of the packings this register lists 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 232 squares, each a rational centre and a rational t=tan(θ/2), in a square of side 15.7781745930520227686…, 2.8×10−15 above the side the Kingbird catalogue prints, 15.77817459305202. Square for square, its pose lies within 1.5×10−4 of the binary64 pose the atlas pictures for this count. 4 squares move by more than 1×10−8, all of them squares the source lists as carrying no force; every other square moves by at most 1.8×10−15. 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 proved s(232)≤15.77817459305203, the verified upper bound until 11 October 2026: 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 an unrecorded author, via a hand construction.

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)

Nate Chaoweeraprasit’s certificate (T-136)

Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing, reported on jlevy/squares#481, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 15.7674283499418417 (T-136). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 232 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 10 October 2026 and the final review of 11 October 2026 accepted the replay for finite feasibility. That proves s(232)≤15.7674283499418417, the verified upper bound until 12 October 2026: confirmed, independently re-implemented. It says nothing about optimality, rigidity or a local minimum.

The source states that SQUISH’s solver, its verification and the issue were written with Claude Opus 5.5 under the author’s direction.

The house it replaces, 15.77817459305202 from the catalogue’s packing (T-101), stays retained with its own replay as history.

Daniil Ostashev’s certificate (T-158)

Ostashev’s composition of his 38-square rectangle with a 76-square piece of Friedman’s n = 85 packing, reported on jlevy/squares#528, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 15.7641743174865967 (T-158). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 232 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(232)≤15.7641743174865967, 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, 15.7674283499418417 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing (T-136), stays retained with its own replay as history. T-174 at 15.7641743174865967, 1.58×10−19 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 refinement, after PingYou Ltd’s, of Ostashev’s composition of his 38-square rectangle with a 76-square piece of Friedman’s n = 85 packing, reported in his repository on 14 October 2026, with no issue, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 15.76417431748659663 (T-186). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 232 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(232)≤15.76417431748659663, 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, 15.7641743174865967 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 15.7641743174865967 and T-136 at 15.7674283499418417, stay verified and are not selected. T-193’s exact algebraic side at this count, a root of a degree-7 integer polynomial 1.58×10−99 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.