|
Left examples have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.
Right examples have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.
In exact Bongard Problems, it is always clear where each relevant example should be sorted. Ambiguity is allowed, but only if it is clear precisely which cases are ambiguous.
For quantity-based BPs, this sometimes means it is possible to calculate exactly the values of the examples (when the examples are themselves specified exactly enough).
Often a precise divide between values on a spectrum comes from intuitively "crossing a threshold." For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles. Two sides of a Bongard Problem on opposite ends of a threshold, coming close to it, are interpreted as having precise divide between sides, right up against that threshold..
IMPORTANT: For Bongard Problems based on images we assume the intended geometry represented by the image is understood before we sort. The case of a "poorly drawn square" is not here considered an ambiguous case for BP6 triangles vs. squares; a shape is either a square or it isn't.
However, for Bongard Problems specifically about approximation (e.g. BP10 approximately triangular outline vs. approximately convex quadrilateral outline) even in the pure geometry there is a spectrum of how closely a shape approximates something; there are ambiguous cases here.
For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "literalgeometry" (BP913). | 
