Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Tiling with Three Polygons is Undecidable

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2409.11582 v1 pith:NPXVPOXO submitted 2024-09-17 cs.CG math.MG

classification cs.CGmath.MG
keywords polygonsthreetilingundecidableallowingbestco-re-completeconstruction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We prove that the following problem is co-RE-complete and thus undecidable: given three simple polygons, is there a tiling of the plane where every tile is an isometry of one of the three polygons (either allowing or forbidding reflections)? This result improves on the best previous construction which requires five polygons.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Two Tiling is Undecidable

    cs.CG 2025-06 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    Tiling the plane with two polygonal prototiles is undecidable, improving the known three-tile bound, and monotiling under local edge-to-edge matching rules is undecidable for the first time.

  2. Undecidability of Translational Tiling with Three Tiles

    math.CO 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Deciding translational tiling of Z^4 by three connected polyhypercubes is undecidable, shown by reduction from Wang's domino problem.

  3. Undecidability of Tiling the Plane with a Set of 5 Polyominoes

    math.CO 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A proof is claimed that determining whether a set of five polyominoes can tile the plane is undecidable, via a new edge-labeling construction.

Pith tools