Bongard Problems whose left examples alone could communicate their pattern vs. other Bongard Problems.

Left-sorted BPs have the the keyword "left-narrow" on the OEBP.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a large collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other related possibilities. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is thought to be typical. If one were expecting there to be triangles, the absence of triangles would be noticeable. (See left-BP1111, the keyword "assuming", for Bongard Problems that require the solver to go in with special expectations.)

And a person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of just polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon. On the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

Both sides of a BP can be narrow, e.g. BP6.

Further, a pattern and its direct negation can be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 ("right-narrow") flipped.

Bongard Problems whose left examples alone could communicate the pattern vs. other Bongard Problems.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a large collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other related possibilities. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is thought to be typical. If one were expecting there to be triangles, the absence of triangles would be noticeable. (See left-BP1111, the keyword "assuming", for Bongard Problems that require the solver to go in with special expectations.)

And a person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of just polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon. On the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

Both sides of a BP can be narrow, e.g. BP6.

Further, a pattern and its direct negation can be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a large collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other related possibilities. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is thought to be typical. If one were expecting there to be triangles, the absence of triangles would be noticeable. (See left-BP1111, the keyword "assuming", for Bongard Problems that require the solver to go in with special expectations.)

A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

Both sides of a BP can be narrow, e.g. BP6.

Further, a pattern and its direct negation can be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a large collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other possible related examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

Both sides of a BP can be narrow, e.g. BP6.

Further, a pattern and its direct negation can be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a large collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other possible related examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

Both sides of a BP can be narrow, e.g. BP6.

More specifically, a pattern and its direct negation can be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a large collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other possible related examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

Both sides of a BP can be narrow, e.g. BP6.

More specifically, a pattern and its negation can be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a large collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other possible related examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

It is possible for both sides of a BP to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

More specifically, it is possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a huge collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A huge collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A huge collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other possible related examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

It is possible for both sides of a BP to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

More specifically, it is possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a huge collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A huge collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A huge collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

Intuitively, a narrow pattern seems smaller in comparison to the space of other possible related examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of other polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

It is possible for both sides of a BP to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

More specifically, it is possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a huge collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A huge collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A huge collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

A narrow pattern seems intuitively smaller in comparison to the space of other possible related examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of other polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

It is possible for both sides of a BP to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

More specifically, it is possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a huge collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A huge collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A huge collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

A narrow pattern of examples seems intuitively smaller in comparison to the space of possible examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of other polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

It is possible for both sides of a BP to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

More specifically, it is possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a huge collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A huge collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A huge collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

A narrow pattern of examples seems intuitively smaller in comparison to the space of possible examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly thought to be typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of other polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

It is possible for both sides of a problem to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

It is furthermore possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a huge collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A huge collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A huge collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

A narrow pattern of examples seems intuitively smaller in comparison to the space of possible examples. Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what is implicitly seen as typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of other polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons in a collection of polygons.

It is possible for both sides of a problem to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

It is furthermore possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.

Call a pattern "narrow" if it is likely to be noticed in a huge collection of examples, without any counterexamples provided.

A huge collection of triangles will be recognized as such; "triangles" is a narrow pattern. A huge collection of non-triangular shapes will just be seen as "shapes"; "not triangles" is not narrow.

A narrow pattern of examples seems intuitively smaller in comparison to all possible examples (even despite if both are infinite). Narrow patterns tend to be phrased positively ("is [property]"), while non-narrow patterns opposite narrow patterns tend to be phrased negatively ("is not [property]").

It makes a difference what sort of examples are implicitly seen as typical. A person might notice the absence of triangles in a collection of other polygons because a triangle is such a typical example of a polygon; on the other hand, a person will probably not notice the absence of 174-gons.

It is possible for both sides of a problem to be narrow, e.g. BP6.

It is furthermore possible for a pattern and its negation to be narrow, e.g. BP20.

Note that this is not just BP514 flipped.