Case record
The best packing known for 307 squares, side 17.98086278…, Chaoweeraprasit 2026. Regularized by the Squares Project with Daniel's regularizer (evand/square-packing, MIT)
As published
The packing as published, Chaoweeraprasit 2026 [PingYou PR 574 certificates 2026-10-13]

n=307

= corrects Nagamochi 2005open

17.53672503…≤s(307)≤17.98086278…

17.5317.981
171819
17.52118.521
nn+1

Proven

17.53672≤s(307)≤17.980863

  • exact

Citation record n-307

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

upperChaoweeraprasit & PingYou Ltd, GitHub (confirmed T-174)

Open

  • optimality

Bounds

Best known packing

17.98086278…

17.98086278405469107
Found by
Chaoweeraprasit 2026
Improved by
PingYou Ltd
Construction
—
Source
[PingYou PR 574 certificates 2026-10-13]
Evidence
E-pingyou-574-certificate-report
Verified upper bound

17.98086278…

17.98086278405469107

The reported value, verified here.

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

17.59416114…

17.594161147004
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=307, k = 17 and interval 27 give a(307) = 17.594161147004160295509592381043..., 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

17.53672503…

17.5367250374
Corrects
Nagamochi 2005 (T-007)
Evidence
E-karakus-strip-lower, E-karakus-strip-measure-interval
Gap

0.44413774…

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-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-163 V2 C1 Fang after Arslanov, Mustafin, Shangitbayev, Ellsworth, Stead, de Winter, Daniel, Couzo · 2026-10-14 · n = 211, 241, 273, 307

    s(n² − n + 1) < n for every n ≥ 15, and n² − n + F(n) squares below side n, from Fang

    Claim and records
    Claim
    Fang states two theorems of a note, draft v0.6 of 13 October 2026, which is not in his repository: Theorem 1, s(n^2 - n + 1) < n for every integer n >= 15; and Theorem 2, s(n^2 - n + F(n)) < n with F(n) = 1 + max{p + 2q : 16p + 21q <= n - 15}. The proof glues a squeezable 17 x 16 rectangle of 257 squares, or a 22 x 21 rectangle of 443 that adds two, onto a square packing (Lemma 3, tools/glue.py) and inducts on n from finitely many certificates; the construction gives side n - 1/20000 at every n >= 15.

    Inside the case corpus the theorem's inventory certifies s(211)≤14.99995, s(241)≤15.99995, s(273)≤16.99995 and s(307)≤17.99995, the counts n^2 - n + F(n) for n=15 to 18. Each is above its case's bound (T-149, T-098, T-098, T-136), so these four finite bounds are superseded; nothing supersedes the theorem itself, which no other result implies at any n.

    The 14 October review re-derived both theorems from the retained material and decided every finite piece the chains use, and rebuilt all 76 inventory certificates byte for byte; both maintained exact routes decided the six retained ones, at 211, 241, 273, 307, 308 and 932, with their controls. The note itself has not been read.

    Credit the theorem and its certificates to Fang (https://github.com/TheSnakeFang/squarepack-certs). The gluing lemma is Arslanov, Mustafin and Shangitbayev's decomposition (Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 28(4), P4.22, 2021); the base packings are de Winter's 211, Ellsworth's and Stead's 241 and 273, the AMS21 and Ellsworth packings of m^2 - m squares, and the author's own; the rectangles grow from Ellsworth's, Stead's and Couzo's packings; the certificate format and the pieces' certificates are Daniel's. The search, the verifier and the bundle were written and run with Claude (Anthropic), directed and reviewed by the author.
    Significance
    A bound family for every n >= 15 with an explicit construction: the deficiency bound c*(k) <= k - 1 - F(k) improves Arslanov, Mustafin and Shangitbayev's k - 1 at every k >= 15 and Ryu's at 15 <= k <= 78 and at k = 86; it settles no case n <= 324, and its four in-corpus finite bounds trail the cases.
    Novelty
    previously-published Present in an identified source
    Records

    n = 211n = 241n = 273n = 307registerevidence 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 0 of the retained witness (witness id 1) translates 0.27292 along (1, 0) with the packing still valid, so the configuration admits a non-trivial feasible motion; 17 of its 307 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-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-136'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: s(307) <= 17.98205200143469895, Casson's packing, larger than the reported side (Casson)
  • Priority: s(307) <= 17.981999068165020, the first of Couzo's packings for this count (Couzo)
  • Priority: Earlier house 17.981030548633310696277454165157 from [evand exact optima 2026-10-05], the case’s ceiling until 11 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Couzo, Daniel)
  • Priority: Earlier house 17.9808627840546911 from [SQUISH third request 2026-10-09], the case’s ceiling from 11 October 2026 until 17 October 2026; its certificate and replay remain retained. (Chaoweeraprasit (itsnaka))

s(307) — 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=307, k=17 and interval 27 give a(307)=17.594161147004160295509592381043…, so the reported lower bound here is now s(307)≥17.594161147004, rounded down, above Nagamochi’s closed form, 17.55294535724. 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 exact re-solve of Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing (T-174) is now this case’s house: its exact certificate proves s(307)≤17.98086278405469107, 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 1.70×10−31. The earlier ceiling, displayed outward as 17.9808627840546911 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing (T-136), applied until this adoption and stays retained as history (the certificate).

House adoption, 11 October 2026. Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing (T-136) was this case’s house until 17 October 2026: its exact certificate proves s(307)≤17.9808627840546911, the reported and the verified upper bound, 1.68×10−4 below the ceiling the case held until then, 17.981030548633310696277454165157 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(307)≤17.9810305486333106963…, and the strongest lower bound independently verified here is 17.536725 from Karakuş’s general theorem, leaving a gap of 0.4443. 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 307 squares in a square of side 17.9810305486333106963…, 1.0×10−11 below the side Couzo prints. Square for square, its pose lies within 1.5×10−3 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 1.5×10−11. 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(307)≤17.9810305486333106963…, the verified upper bound until 11 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(307). 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 17.981030548643712 for this count, dated 27 September 2026 and unchanged when this record retained the repository on 27 September 2026 (T-056). Its first packing for this count, of side 17.981999068165020, 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 17.9810305486437112015…, no larger than 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(307)≤17.981030548643712, 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 17.98205200143469895 for this count, larger than Couzo’s by 0.00102145279098695. 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 17.981999068165020, 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 17.98281564631754.

Found by Arslanov, Mustafin and Shangitbayev in 2019. Improved by Ellsworth in November 2024. Improved by Ellsworth and Hajba in December 2024. Improved by Ellsworth in January 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-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)

Nate Chaoweeraprasit’s certificate (T-136)

Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing, reported on jlevy/squares#481, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 17.9808627840546911 (T-136). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 307 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(307)≤17.9808627840546911, the verified upper bound until 17 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, 17.981030548633310696277454165157 from Couzo’s packing, improved by Daniel (T-098), stays retained with its own replay as history. T-174 at 17.9808627840546911, 1.70×10−31 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.

PingYou Ltd’s certificate (T-174)

PingYou Ltd’s exact re-solve of Chaoweeraprasit’s SQUISH packing, reported in pull request #574, at an exact rational side, displayed upward as 17.98086278405469107 (T-174). The certificate gives a rational side and, for each of the 307 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(307)≤17.98086278405469107, 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-136 records, measured here pose by pose as that packing (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, 17.9808627840546911 from Chaoweeraprasit’s packing (T-136), stays retained with its own replay as history.