test

Aaron David Fairbanks

test

Aaron David Fairbanks

See "right-noticed" (left-BP1127).

"Right-unknowable" Bongard Problems (right-BP1124) are "left-noticed".

The keyword "creativeexamples" (left-BP866) is related.

"Noticed" Bongard Problems are also "hardsort" (right-BP864).

See "right-noticed" (left-BP1127).

"Right-unknowable" Bongard Problems (right-BP1124) are "left-noticed".

The keyword "creativeexamples" (left-BP866) is related.

"Noticed" Bongard Problems are "hardsort" (right-BP864).

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

"Left-noticed" means examples are understood to fit left using ingenuity, case-by-case. There is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave (so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed"). However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what an "algorithm" would mean in this context, since it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

See "right-noticed" (left-BP1127).

"Right-unknowable" Bongard Problems (right-BP1124) are "left-noticed".

"Noticed" Bongard Problems are "hardsort" (right-BP864).

See "right-noticed" (left-BP1127).

"Right-unknowable" Bongard Problems (left-BP1124) are "left-noticed".

"Noticed" Bongard Problems are "hardsort" (right-BP864).

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

"Left-noticed" means there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave (so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed"). However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what an "algorithm" would mean in this context, since it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

See "right-noticed" (left-BP1127).

"Noticed" Bongard Problems are also "hardsort" (right-BP864).

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

Another way of phrasing "left-noticed" is there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave (so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed"). However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what an "algorithm" would mean in this context, since it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

Another way of phrasing "left-noticed" is there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave (so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed"). However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what an "algorithm" would mean in this context, since it is it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

Another way of phrasing "left-noticed" is there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave, so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed". However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what an "algorithm" would mean in this context, since it is it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

Another way of phrasing "left-noticed" that there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave, so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed". However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what an "algorithm" would mean in this context, since it is it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

Another way of phrasing "left-noticed" that there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave, so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed". However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what an "algorithm" would mean, since it is it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

Another way of phrasing "left-noticed" that there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot in general be checked by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave, so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed". However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what sort of algorithm we would be looking for, since it is it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-noticed" on the OEBP.

Another way of phrasing "left-noticed" that there is no (obvious) general method to determine a left-fitting example fits left, although some examples can indeed be seen to fit left.

There is a related idea in computability theory: a "non recursively enumerable" property is one that cannot be checked in general by a computer algorithm.

Here, "noticed" is supposed to mean something less formal. For example, it is easy for a human being to check when a simple shape is convex or concave, so BP4 is not labelled "left-noticed". However, it is not as if we use an algorithm to do this, like a computer. (It is not even clear what sort of algorithm we would be looking for, since it is it is ambiguous both what class of shapes the Bongard Problem sorts and how that would be encoded into a computer program's input. There are usually many options and ambiguities like this whenever one tries to formalize the content of a Bongard Problem.)