Covering a square with unit squares
Alexander Soifer in [S] raises the question of the smallest number of unit squares that can cover a square of side . He shows the asymptotic upper bound , and the small values , , and . He conjectures the asymptotic lower bound .
Bibliography
[S] Soifer, Alexander, "Covering a square of side n+epsilon with unit squares," J. of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 113 (2006):380-383.
* indicates original appearance(s) of problem.
A flaw in the text of the conjecture
The square to cover is not a unit square.
A simple upper bound for Pi(n)
For any positive integer n: Pi(n) does not exceed sqr(n)+n+1 .
Correction
Sorry; please replace the last part by this:
Resulting upper bounds for n from 1 to 3
The given bound confirms the bounds for n=1 (3) and for n=2 (7) given by Soifer in [S] but improves the bound for n=3 (13 instead of 14).
Possibly further readings
The two articles listed below may be on the same topic but I can't get access even to the abstracts: [1] Title: A Sharper Upper Bound for Cover-Up Squared Authors: Dmytro Karabsh and Alexander Soifer Publication: Geombinatorics Quarterly Vol XVI, Issue 1, July 2006 Pages: 219 ff. (to 226 ?) [2] Title: Note on Covering Square with Equal Squares Authors: Dmytro Karabsh and Alexander Soifer Publication: Geombinatorics Quarterly Vol XVIII, Issue 1, July 2008 Pages: 13 ff. (to 17 ?)
A (currently) valid link to the referenced article
www.uccs.edu/~faculty/asoifer/docs/untitled.pdf
Correction
In the URL there has to be a tilde (ASCII code 126) between 'edu/' and 'faculty' instead of the visible blank.
A lower bound of the upper bound from polyomino-covering in [S]
(Using instead of )
In [S], Soifer derives .
As he mentioned, one can improve the covering construction. Holding the square of side length in the lower left corner, putting a square of side length in the upper right corner, covering the remaining uncovered area by 2 polyomino-coverings of rectangles of sides by , removing useless unit squares in polyominos, we get a lower bound for the rhs of that inequality:
Denote by the minimal value of this expression when varying from 2 to .
Results of computer calculations:
iff or .
For growing (checked up to ), for the lowest optimal , seems to converge to 1, and seems to converge to 3/4.