Matched: the best known value

Packing 10 unit squares in a square

What is the smallest square that holds 10 squares of side 1, without overlap? The best known answer is a side of 3.7071067812, from Frits Göbel, 1979. Velmar Cut matched it.

10 squares in a square of side 3.7071067812, 7 upright and 3 turned

The numbers

Best known side3.7071067812
Best known side, in full3.70710678118654
Side from Velmar Cut3.7071067812
Side from Velmar Cut, in full3.707106781187110
Difference, Velmar Cut minus best known+5.700E-13
Found byFrits Göbel, 1979
StatusProved optimal
Time to reach it0.075 s, one run
Threads used16
MachineIntel Core i5-12600K, 10 cores, 16 threads
Squares7 upright, 3 turned
A plain grid needsside 4

The time to reach this result on one desktop PC.

The problem at 10 squares

A plain grid needs side 4 for just one square more than a grid of side 3 holds. The best known side has the same shape as at 5, a whole number plus ½√2, here 3 + ½√2. This layout has seven upright squares and three turned.

A plain grid: side 4

10 upright squares in rows inside a square of side 4
In upright rows, 10 squares need side 4.

Best known: side 3.7071067812

10 squares in a square of side 3.7071067812, 7 upright and 3 turned
Velmar Cut's layout, at the best known side from Frits Göbel, 1979.

Blue squares stand upright, orange squares are turned. Both pictures are at the same scale.

History

The best known value at this size is the result of Frits Göbel, 1979, and it is their result that Velmar Cut equals.

Proved optimal by Walter Stromquist in 2003.

Walter Stromquist had already claimed this proof in an unpublished manuscript of 1984. An alternative with the fewest turned squares adds an L shape to the 5-square packing.

When Side Who What happened
early 1979 3 + ½√2 ≈ 3.70711 Frits Göbel found
2003 same side Walter Stromquist proved optimal, published

Sources

The best known values come from "Squares in Squares", David Ellsworth, from the original by Erich Friedman.

Each size names who holds its value and since when. It is their result that Velmar Cut equals.

Is the packing valid?

Yes. The certificate passes the exact check: 10 pieces, each exactly a unit square, each inside the box, no two overlapping.

How close is it to the best known value?

The side from Velmar Cut minus the best known value is +5.700E-13, within the rule's 1E-11.

A match: the certificate passes the exact check, and |L - best known| <= 1E-11, the difference published unrounded for each size. L is the side of the certificate's box, rounded up at 15 decimals.

You don't have to trust us

With plain Python and no other software, verify_exact.py beside the certificate checks the file above by exact arithmetic, with no rounding.

python verify_exact.py 10-squares-in-a-square.csv --squares=10 --reference=3.70710678118654 --epsilon=1e-11

It does not prove that the packing is optimal, that the reference is the current best known value, or how the layout was found.

The full check and what it covers

Free trial

Seven days with every edition

Install Velmar Cut, enter the parts and stock of a current job and print the cutting schedule. The trial starts on first run and needs no account or card.