Case record
The best packing known for 304 squares, side 17.92942775…, Ostashev 2026. Regularized by the Squares Project with its own axis tool (regularize_axis_components/2)
As published
The packing as published, Ostashev 2026 [Mishapolk KKT refinements 2026-10-14]

n=304

= corrects Nagamochi 2005open

17.44845125…≤s(304)≤17.92942775…

17.4417.929
171819
17.43618.436
nn+1

Proven

17.44845≤s(304)≤17.929428

  • exact

Citation record n-304

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

upperOstashev & Mishapolk, GitHub (confirmed T-186)

Open

  • optimality

Bounds

Best known packing

17.92942775…

17.92942775807517497
Found by
Ostashev 2026
Improved by
Polkovskyi
Construction
—
Source
[Mishapolk KKT refinements 2026-10-14]
Evidence
E-mishapolk-70a033f-certificate-report
Verified upper bound

17.92942775…

17.92942775807517497

The reported value, verified here.

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

17.49038298…

17.490382985636
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=304, k = 17 and interval 25 give a(304) = 17.490382985636778684148708282520..., 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

17.44845125…

17.4484512566
Corrects
Nagamochi 2005 (T-007)
Evidence
E-karakus-strip-lower, E-karakus-strip-measure-interval
Gap

0.48097650…

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-098 V3 C3 Daniel after Couzo, de Winter, Ellsworth, Levy · 2026-10-05 · 48 cases

    Exact optima of 48 known-best packings: s(n) ≤ S', 3.5e-13 to 5.0e-11 below each printed side

  • T-151 V3 C3 Chaoweeraprasit after Couzo, Gupta, Ellsworth, Friedman, Levy · 2026-10-12 · 9 cases

    Nine exact rational packings from SQUISH's fourth request

  • T-152 V3 C3 Couzo after Chaoweeraprasit, Fang, Daniel, Ellsworth, Levy · 2026-10-12 · n = 304, 305

    Exact rational refinements of SQUISH's Mondrian packings of 304 and 305 squares

    Claim and records
    Claim
    Two complete rational source certificates by Couzo, reported on jlevy/squares#506, prove finite upper bounds at the exact sides they state: s(304)≤17.929565946848500974381965343574 and s(305)≤17.950466482137712273488570226115.

    The same release states s(338)≤18.906436500551825926629088515923, s(339)≤18.929433883807662155272760949615, s(344)≤18.994353244943442354485256580362, s(375)≤38166979981362750351336743477/1917328312988500000000000000, s(376)≤19.910276586884544180280281394636, s(378)≤19.942541777354810533331219672476, s(379)≤19.953572709538574550151361449798, s(380)≤19.987440766555387551986240574787 and s(381)≤19.99266328846356482088565989631, beyond the case corpus; the source register tracks those as beyond-horizon rows, proved by the same evidence, which replace the rows it held at 338, 339, 344, 375, 376, 378 and 379.

    Each certificate gives a rational side and, for each unit square, a rational centre and the tangent of its half-angle, in Daniel's format; each side rounds up to the 12-place print of the issue. Ten are exact optima from Daniel's exact contact solver; the one at 375 is a rational witness, the author's decimal packing with centres dilated by 1 + 1e-11, as the issue says, about the point (1/2, 1/2) as measured here. The author reports that all eleven pass Daniel's verify_cert.py and a copy of this repository's sqpack verifier in exact rational arithmetic; those statements are the author's, and no source program ran here.

    No square touches a wall: every exact optimum clears its walls by at least 1/(2*10^20) and its pairs by about 1e-20, and the witness at 375 by 1e-15 and 7.05e-12.

    All 45 retained jobs of the fifteen certificates the two source commits add or change, the eleven requested ones with their duplicate-square and outside-container controls among them, were decided twice on 11 October 2026 by both maintained exact routes, and the twelve at 304, 305, 344 and 381 again on 12 October, each time equal to its retained row. A third exact route, half-extent containment and exact intersection area, decided all eleven with six controls each. One maintained route is the verifier the source ran; the independent rational corner checker and the third route are independently re-implemented. The 12 October review found no blocking defect.

    Each side is below the ceiling its case held, Daniel's exact optimum of Couzo's packing (T-098), by 5.08e-03 at 304 and 2.49e-03 at 305, and below every other report pending there: issue 500's exact sides (T-151) by 9.11e-05 and 7.84e-05, and at 305 T-140 and issue 489's tie of it by 6.73e-04 and T-136 by 7.30e-04. On 12 October 2026 the case records adopted this entry as the house at both counts, each case's reported and verified upper bounds moving together and each earlier house kept as history (T-098 at 304; T-140, which had held 305 since 11 October), with T-151 verified and not selected at both counts and T-136 at 305. Private-worker custody was closed in the same change (packing/devtools/house-custody-2026-10-11.json).

    Credit Couzo (https://github.com/franciscouzo/square-packing), with the packings each started from, as the author asks: Chaoweeraprasit's SQUISH Mondrian packings of issue 500 (T-151) at 304 and 305, improved by Daniel's fq at 304 and by the author's search cycle with Ellsworth's refine_packing, basin hopping and LP at 305; Daniel's exact contact solver wrote both exact optima.

    Measured pose by pose, both refine issue 500's arrangements rather than being new ones: every square matches one of issue 500's packing one to one under a reflection of the box, none moved beyond a tenth of a unit, with 243 and 257 squares moved beyond 1e-9 and 72 and 92 turned.

    Beyond the case corpus, 344 starts from Fang's 344 (issue 484), improved by the author's basin hopping, and is measured as Fang's arrangement moved, as Daniel's Hunt 3 344 is; 338, 339, 375, 376, 378, 379, 380 and 381 start from the author's smaller packings with an L-shaped border row added and squares removed: 338 and 375 from his 303, itself from SQUISH's (issue 401), 339 and 376 from his earlier 304, 378 from 306, 379 from 342, and 380 and 381 from his 343 and 344, both from Fang's 344.

    The issue states that the search code and the request were written with Claude (Claude Code), directed and reviewed by the author.
    Significance
    Smaller finite construction sides at n=304 and 305, 5.08e-03 and 2.49e-03 below the case ceilings and 9.11e-05 and 7.84e-05 below issue 500's packings they refine, every square one to one under a reflection of the box and none moved beyond a tenth, as T-140 refines issue 481's; the smallest sides known at both counts; no lower bound or optimum.
    Novelty
    previously-published Present in an identified source
    Records

    n = 304n = 305registerevidence 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-175 V3 C3 Ostashev after Nakajima, Daniel, de Winter, Couzo, Levy, Xu · 2026-10-14 · n = 211, 241, 304

    New packings of 211, 241 and 304 squares, two with merged tilted bands, each certified exactly

    Claim and records
    Claim
    Three complete rational source certificates report finite upper-bound improvements at the exact sides they state: s(211)≤149936941865832465706359181817612514235389167555807511399813149936941865832465706359181817612514235389167555807511399813/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000, s(241)≤9991958905656775259135410873409821230409663792812755550161009991958905656775259135410873409821230409663792812755550161/625000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 and s(304)≤358588555161503499313326522779782297248782400899192783432303585885551615034993133265227797822972487824008991927834323/20000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

    All 12 retained jobs, four certificates with their duplicate-square and outside-container controls, were decided again here on 14 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 certificates this entry cites 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 14 October review found no blocking defect.

    The author reports that each packing passes its own C++ checker (sqverify --precise --certify, MPFR then GMP rationals) at delta = 1e-60, that sqverify --check-cert certifies the shipped certificates in GMP rationals with no dilation and no tolerance, and that a separately written 80-digit mpmath cross-check finds least separations of 5e-21 at 211 and 241 and 4.995e-21 at 176 and 304; the issue states that all three checkers are the author's, written with AI assistance, the first two sharing the C++ parser and geometry.

    It also states that each side is the exact first-order optimum of its contact topology, with nonnegative KKT multipliers at a 60-digit solution reached by two routes that agree, and the load-bearing squares scaled by 1 + 1e-20. Those statements are the author's; no source program ran here.

    Credit Ostashev (https://github.com/dostashev/square-packing) with the packings and their certificates, which the issue says are new arrangements.

    At 176, 211 and 241 a packing whose tilted squares form two bands was re-hardened on a GPU with every square soft and the box held (soft-to-rigid, after Nakajima's idea), and the two bands merged into one V: at 176 seeded from the author's earlier composition of issue 528's 38-square piece and issue 562's 44-square piece, at 211 from Daniel's exact optimum of de Winter's packing, and at 241 from Daniel's exact optimum of Couzo's packing, the case's house. At 304 the same re-hardening relaxed the author's composition of a 55-square (h + 8) x h piece and a 68-square (h + 7) x h piece without forming a V. Each was solved to the exact optimum of its contact topology.

    The 211 is a different packing from the author's T-149, which it replaces in his repository. The author asks that the seeds' authors (Couzo, Daniel, de Winter) and the composition pieces' sources be acknowledged.

    The issue states AI assistance: an AI-assisted research loop the author drives with his own ideas, merging the bands at the junction being his; AI agents wrote and ran the search and verification code, and an agent extended the move from his compositions to published two-band packings.

    Measured pose by pose by that review, the 211 and 304 are new arrangements and the 241 rebuilds the seed's design, every square paired and 15 moved beyond a tenth. On 15 October 2026 the case record at 304 adopted this entry as its house, its reported and verified upper bounds moving together and Couzo's certificate (T-152) kept as history; private-worker custody was closed in the same change (packing/devtools/house-custody-2026-10-11.json). At 211 and 241 Couzo's issue 586 (T-182) is smaller and holds the cases.
    Significance
    Three new arrangements, 1.38e-04 to 2.64e-03 below the case ceilings, as T-158 is; no lower bound or optimum.
    Novelty
    previously-published Present in an identified source
    Records

    n = 211n = 241n = 304registerevidence 1evidence 2

  • 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

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 5 of the retained witness (witness id 6) translates 0.001813 along (0.847682, 0.530504) with the packing still valid, so the configuration admits a non-trivial feasible motion; 36 of its 304 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 its own axis tool (regularize_axis_components/2). 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-175's packing (Polkovskyi after Ostashev, Couzo, PingYou Ltd, Levy), registered as T-186 for the upper bound its exact side proves.

Open questions
  • Priority: s(304) <= 17.94880191214547338, Casson's packing, larger than the reported side (Casson)
  • Priority: s(304) <= 17.936633693223122, the first of Couzo's packings for this count (Couzo)
  • Priority: Earlier house 17.934650018390681724105084929881 from [evand exact optima 2026-10-05], the case’s ceiling until 12 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Couzo, Daniel)
  • Priority: Earlier house 17.9295659468485010 from [Couzo certificates 2026-10-11], the case’s ceiling from 12 October 2026 until 15 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Chaoweeraprasit (itsnaka), Couzo)
  • Priority: Earlier house 17.9294277580751750 from [Ostashev merged bands 2026-10-13], the case’s ceiling from 15 October 2026 until 16 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Ostashev)

s(304) — 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=304, k=17 and interval 25 give a(304)=17.490382985636778684148708282520…, so the reported lower bound here is now s(304)≥17.490382985636, rounded down, above Nagamochi’s closed form, 17.46207763315. 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 of Ostashev’s n = 304 packing (T-186) is now this case’s house: its exact certificate proves s(304)≤17.92942775807517497, 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 1.79×10−19. The earlier ceiling, displayed outward as 17.9294277580751750 from Ostashev’s packing (T-175), applied until this adoption and stays retained as history (the certificate).

House adoption, 15 October 2026. Ostashev’s packing (T-175) was this case’s house until 16 October 2026: its exact certificate proves s(304)≤17.9294277580751750, the reported and the verified upper bound, 1.38×10−4 below the ceiling the case held until then, 17.9295659468485010 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing, improved by Couzo (T-152), which stays retained as history (the certificate).

House adoption, 12 October 2026. Couzo’s refinement of Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH Mondrian packing (T-152) was this case’s house until 15 October 2026: its exact certificate proves s(304)≤17.9295659468485010, the reported and the verified upper bound, 5.08×10−3 below the ceiling the case held until then, 17.934650018390681724105084929881 from Couzo’s packing, improved by Daniel (T-098), which stays retained as history (the certificate).

Open. Previously, the best known published packing, Couzo’s at Daniel’s exact optimum (T-098), gives s(304)≤17.9346500183906817242…, and the strongest lower bound independently verified here is 17.448451 from Karakuş’s general theorem, leaving a gap of 0.4862. General bound: s(N) >= 1/2 + sqrt(N - floor(sqrt(N)) + 1/4).

The exact optimum

Daniel’s square-packing published on 5 October 2026 an exact rational certificate of this packing at its exact optimum (T-098): the same 304 squares in a square of side 17.9346500183906817242…, 5.2×10−12 below the side Couzo prints. Square for square, its pose lies within 1.5×10−4 of the binary64 pose the atlas pictures for this count. 3 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 1.0×10−11. The known-best witness this record lists is that binary64 pose, posed at its finder’s larger side; the side above is witnessed by the certificate itself. 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, each square a rational centre and a rational t=tan(θ/2).

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 proves s(304)≤17.9346500183906817242…, the verified upper bound until 12 October 2026; it says nothing about optimality. The source reports the exact point as a KKT local minimum: multipliers that keep it in equilibrium, a reduced Hessian positive definite once its exact flat motions are set aside (its per-count report), and no first-order descent across corner-to-corner contacts, each computed numerically at that point; none of that is verified here, and it bears on this packing alone, not on s(304). 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

Couzo’s square-packing reports a packing of side 17.934650018395903 for this count, dated 26 September 2026 and unchanged when this record retained the repository on 27 September 2026 (T-056). Its first packing for this count, of side 17.936633693223122, is dated 24 September 2026. The repository names no method and no tolerance, and itself states no AI assistance; its author said on issue #227 that he found the 102 and 103 packings “with the help of Claude”.

This repository certifies it exactly. The retained decimal pose rounds to an exact rational packing at centre dilation 1, of side 17.9346500183959035566…, 5.566×10−16 above the printed side, and every pair and every wall is decided over ℚ twice, by the promotion’s exact separating-axis test and by an independent checker that shares no code with it (receipt). That proves s(304)≤17.934650018395904, which was the verified upper bound until Daniel’s exact optimum above replaced it; it says nothing about optimality. Interval arithmetic on the printed pose itself, with each angle’s true cosine and sine and no rational rounding, decides every pair and wall again and gives the same bound (interval route).

Casson’s square-packing, dated 23 September 2026 and made with the help of Claude as its README says, reports a packing of side 17.94880191214547338 for this count, larger than Couzo’s by 0.01415189374957038. Casson’s is the earlier of the two by the timestamps this record’s priority notes keep: Couzo’s first packing for this count, of side 17.936633693223122, is dated 24 September 2026. The record states both dates and infers nothing about whether either packing derives from the other.

The previous best known packing

Before this intake the best known packing was the Kingbird catalogue’s, of side 17.94917201919110.

Found by Ellsworth in 2026, via simulated annealing.

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)

Francisco Couzo’s certificate (T-152)

Couzo’s refinement of Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH Mondrian packing, reported on jlevy/squares#506, at exact side 8964782973424250487190982671787/500000000000000000000000000000, displayed upward as 17.9295659468485010 (T-152). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 304 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 12 October 2026 accepted the replay for finite feasibility. That proves s(304)≤17.9295659468485010, the verified upper bound until 15 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, 17.934650018390681724105084929881 from Couzo’s packing, improved by Daniel (T-098), stays retained with its own replay as history. The other certificates confirmed here at this count, T-151 at 17.9296570421708801, stay verified and are not selected.

Daniil Ostashev’s certificate (T-175)

Ostashev’s packing, reported on jlevy/squares#575, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 17.9294277580751750 (T-175). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 304 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 14 October 2026 accepted the replay for finite feasibility. That proves s(304)≤17.9294277580751750, 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 drives an AI-assisted research loop with his own ideas, merging the tilted bands being his, and that AI agents wrote and ran the search and verification code.

The house it replaces, 17.9295659468485010 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing, improved by Couzo (T-152), stays retained with its own replay as history. The other certificates confirmed here at this count, T-174 at 17.9295659468485010 and T-151 at 17.9296570421708801, stay verified and are not selected.

Mykhailo Polkovskyi’s certificate (T-186)

Polkovskyi’s tighter certificate of Ostashev’s n = 304 packing, reported in his repository on 14 October 2026, with no issue, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 17.92942775807517497 (T-186). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 304 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(304)≤17.92942775807517497, 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-175 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, 17.9294277580751750 from Ostashev’s packing (T-175), stays retained with its own replay as history. The other certificates confirmed here at this count, T-174 at 17.9295659468485010, T-152 at 17.9295659468485010 and T-151 at 17.9296570421708801, stay verified and are not selected.