Bongard Problems sorted left have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.

Bongard Problems sorted right have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.

In an exact BP, any relevant example is either clearly sorted left, clearly sorted right, or clearly not sorted. (No unsorted cases at all is the keyword "allsorted" left-BP509.)

How is it decided whether or not a rule is exact? There would need to be another rule determining the collection of examples considered for sorting. One can try to come up with increasingly thorough rules to specify what should count as a relevant example. Different ways of formalizing will have slightly different consequences, while Bongard Problems by design communicate ideas without fixing any such formalization. The label "exact" can only mean a BP's rule seems precise to those who see it. (This BP "exact vs. fuzzy" is fuzzy.)

An exact spectrum-related BP (keyword "spectrum" left-BP507) usually means the sides take either side of an apparent threshold. For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles.

Imperfections in drawn images should generally not be considered when deciding whether a BP is exact or fuzzy. Just because one can draw a square badly does not mean "triangle vs. quadrilateral" (BP6) should be called fuzzy--similar vagueness arises in all hand-drawn BPs. (For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "imperfectionscanmatter" left-BP913.)

Sometimes the way a Bongard Problem would sort some examples is an unsolved problem in mathematics. (See e.g. BP820.) There is a precise criterion used to verify a sorted example fits where it fits (some kind of mathematical proof); however, it is still unclear where some examples fit. Whether or not such a BP should be labelled "exact" might be debated.

Bongard Problems sorted left have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.

Bongard Problems sorted right have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.

In an exact BP, any relevant example is either clearly sorted left, clearly sorted right, or clearly not sorted. (No unsorted border cases at all is the keyword "allsorted" left-BP509.)

How is it decided whether or not a rule is exact? There would need to be another rule determining the collection of examples considered for sorting. One can try to come up with increasingly thorough rules to specify what should count as a relevant example. Different ways of formalizing will have slightly different consequences, while Bongard Problems by design communicate ideas without fixing any such formalization. The label "exact" can only mean a BP's rule seems precise to those who see it. (This BP "exact vs. fuzzy" is fuzzy.)

An exact spectrum-related BP (keyword "spectrum" left-BP507) usually means the sides take either side of an apparent threshold. For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles.

Imperfections in drawn images should generally not be considered when deciding whether a BP is exact or fuzzy. Just because one can draw a square badly does not mean "triangle vs. quadrilateral" (BP6) should be called fuzzy--similar vagueness arises in all hand-drawn BPs. (For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "imperfectionscanmatter" left-BP913.)

Sometimes the way a Bongard Problem would sort some examples is an unsolved problem in mathematics. (See e.g. BP820.) There is a precise criterion used to verify a sorted example fits where it fits (some kind of mathematical proof); however, it is still unclear where some examples fit. Whether or not such a BP should be labelled "exact" might be debated.

Bongard Problems sorted left have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.

Bongard Problems sorted right have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.

In an exact BP, any relevant example is either clearly sorted left, clearly sorted right, or clearly not sorted. (Just no unsorted border cases is the keyword "allsorted" left-BP509.)

How is it decided whether or not a rule is exact? There would need to be another rule determining the collection of examples considered for sorting. One can try to come up with increasingly thorough rules to specify what should count as a relevant example. Different ways of formalizing will have slightly different consequences, while Bongard Problems by design communicate ideas without fixing any such formalization. The label "exact" can only mean a BP's rule seems precise to those who see it. (This BP "exact vs. fuzzy" is fuzzy.)

An exact spectrum-related BP (keyword "spectrum" left-BP507) usually means the sides take either side of an apparent threshold. For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles.

Imperfections in drawn images should generally not be considered when deciding whether a BP is exact or fuzzy. Just because one can draw a square badly does not mean "triangle vs. quadrilateral" (BP6) should be called fuzzy--similar vagueness arises in all hand-drawn BPs. (For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "imperfectionscanmatter" left-BP913.)

Sometimes the way a Bongard Problem would sort some examples is an unsolved problem in mathematics. (See e.g. BP820.) There is a precise criterion used to verify a sorted example fits where it fits (some kind of mathematical proof); however, it is still unclear where some examples fit. Whether or not such a BP should be labelled "exact" might be debated.

See BP876 for the version with pictures of Bongard Problems instead of links to pages on the OEBP.

Bongard Problems sorted left have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.

Bongard Problems sorted right have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.

In an exact BP, any relevant example is either clearly sorted left, clearly sorted right, or clearly not sorted. (No unsorted border cases is the keyword "allsorted" left-BP509.)

How is it decided whether or not a rule is exact? There would need to be another rule determining the collection of examples considered for sorting. One can try to come up with increasingly thorough rules to specify what should count as a relevant example. Different ways of formalizing will have slightly different consequences, while Bongard Problems by design communicate ideas without fixing any such formalization. The label "exact" can only mean a BP's rule seems precise to those who see it. (This BP "exact vs. fuzzy" is fuzzy.)

An exact spectrum-related BP (keyword "spectrum" left-BP507) usually means the sides take either side of an apparent threshold. For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles.

Imperfections in drawn images should generally not be considered when deciding whether a BP is exact or fuzzy. Just because one can draw a square badly does not mean "triangle vs. quadrilateral" (BP6) should be called fuzzy--similar vagueness arises in all hand-drawn BPs. (For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "imperfectionscanmatter" left-BP913.)

Sometimes the way a Bongard Problem would sort some examples is an unsolved problem in mathematics. (See e.g. BP820.) There is a precise criterion used to verify a sorted example fits where it fits (some kind of mathematical proof); however, it is still unclear where some examples fit. Whether or not such a BP should be labelled "exact" might be debated.

Bongard Problems sorted left have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.

Bongard Problems sorted right have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.

In an exact BP, any relevant example is either clearly sorted left, clearly sorted right, or clearly not sorted. (No unsorted border cases is the keyword "wholesort" left-BP509.)

How is it decided whether or not a rule is exact? There would need to be another rule determining the collection of examples considered for sorting. One can try to come up with increasingly thorough rules to specify what should count as a relevant example. Different ways of formalizing will have slightly different consequences, while Bongard Problems by design communicate ideas without fixing any such formalization. The label "exact" can only mean a BP's rule seems precise to those who see it. (This BP "exact vs. fuzzy" is fuzzy.)

An exact spectrum-related BP (keyword "spectrum" left-BP507) usually means the sides take either side of an apparent threshold. For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles.

Imperfections in drawn images should generally not be considered when deciding whether a BP is exact or fuzzy. Just because one can draw a square badly does not mean "triangle vs. quadrilateral" (BP6) should be called fuzzy--similar vagueness arises in all hand-drawn BPs. (For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "imperfectionscanmatter" left-BP913.)

Sometimes the way a Bongard Problem would sort some examples is an unsolved problem in mathematics. (See e.g. BP820.) There is a precise criterion used to verify a sorted example fits where it fits (some kind of mathematical proof); however, it is still unclear where some examples fit. Whether or not such a BP should be labelled "exact" might be debated.

Bongard Problems sorted left have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.

Bongard Problems sorted right have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.

In an exact BP, any relevant example is either clearly sorted left, clearly sorted right, or clearly not sorted. (No unsorted border cases is the keyword "wholesort" left-BP509.)

How is it decided whether or not a rule is exact? There would need to be another rule determining the collection of examples considered for sorting. One can try to come up with increasingly thorough rules to specify what should count as a relevant example. Different ways of formalizing will have slightly different consequences, while Bongard Problems by design communicate ideas without fixing any such formalization. The label "exact" can only mean a BP's rule seems precise to those who see it. (This BP "exact vs. fuzzy" is fuzzy.)

An exact spectrum-related BP (keyword "spectrum" left-BP507) usually means the sides take either side of an apparent threshold. For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles.

Imperfections in drawn images should generally not be considered when deciding whether a BP is exact or fuzzy. Just because one can draw a square badly does not mean "triangle vs. quadrilateral" (BP6) should be called fuzzy--similar vagueness arises in all hand-drawn BPs. (For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "imperfectionscanmatter" left-BP913.)

Sometimes the way a Bongard Problem would sort some examples is an unsolved problem in mathematics. (See e.g. BP820.) In these cases there is a precise criterion used to verify a sorted example fits where it fits--some kind of mathematical proof. However, it is unclear where some examples fit. Whether or not such a BP should be labelled "exact" might be debated.

Bongard Problems with precise definition vs. Bongard Problems with vagueness in the definition.

Bongard Problems with exact definition vs. Bongard Problems with vagueness in the definition.

Left examples have the keyword "exact" on the OEBP.

Right examples have the keyword "fuzzy" on the OEBP.

In an exact BP, any relevant example is either clearly sorted left, clearly sorted right, or clearly not sorted. (No unsorted border cases is the keyword "wholesort" left-BP509.)

How is it decided whether or not a rule is exact? There would need to be another rule determining the collection of examples considered for sorting. One can try to come up with increasingly thorough rules to specify what should count as a relevant example. Different ways of formalizing will have slightly different consequences, while Bongard Problems by design communicate ideas without fixing any such formalization. The label "exact" can only mean a BP's rule seems precise to those who see it. (This BP "exact vs. fuzzy" is fuzzy.)

An exact spectrum-related BP (keyword "spectrum" left-BP507) usually means the sides take either side of an apparent threshold. For example, there is an intuitive threshold between acute and obtuse angles.

Imperfections in drawn images should generally not be considered when deciding whether a BP is exact or fuzzy. Just because one can draw a square badly does not mean "triangle vs. quadrilateral" (BP6) should be called fuzzy--similar vagueness arises in all hand-drawn BPs. (For Bongard Problems in which fine subtleties of drawings, including small imperfections, are meant to be considered, use the keyword "imperfectionscanmatter" left-BP913.)

Sometimes the way a Bongard Problem would sort some examples is an unsolved problem in mathematics. (See e.g. BP820.) In these cases there is a precise criterion used to verify a sorted example fits where it fits--some kind of mathematical proof. However, it is unclear where some examples fit. Whether or not such a BP should be labelled "exact" might be debated.