Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We present Q, an aperiodic tileset consisting of six edge-marked square prototiles with standard nearest-neighbor matching rules. All six prototiles are freely rotatable; two (T1 and T2) admit reflection, while the remaining four (T0, T3, T4, T5) do not. A central challenge in the theory of aperiodic tilings is reducing the number of prototiles re- quired to force aperiodicity. For square Wang tiles under the standard convention of translation- only placement, Jeandel and Rao established an eleven-tile minimal set; Robinson’s earlier six-tile construction, recast as a freely rotatable edge-marked alphabet, requires fourteen deco- rated prototiles. Jeandel and Rao’s minimality result, however, is proved specifically for tilesets restricted to translation, and we are not aware of a comparable minimality result once free ro- tation is permitted – a distinction the field treats as substantive, marking one of the principal relaxations of Wang’s original convention. The aperiodicity of Q is established via mutual local derivability (MLD) with the trilobite and crab tileset of Goodman-Strauss. To our knowledge, Q is the smallest known freely rotatable aperiodic set of edge-marked squares with standard nearest-neighbor matching rules, improving on the fourteen-tile freely rotatable form of Robinson’s tileset; the eleven-tile Jeandel-Rao set is smaller still, but is defined without free rotation, so the two counts are not directly comparable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andrew Bayly (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: