This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

The "world" of a BP is the pattern seen in all examples once the dividing line is removed.

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP, i.e. a BP most naturally has one specific world.

In some cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? Someone seeing all the images together, without a line dividing them, might consider them to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." It is ambiguous: the world could be "triangles and quadrilaterals" or it could be "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is not clear-cut, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily use worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."

Meta-BPs that indicate categories of examples other BPs are allowed to sort.

This is the keyword "world" on the OEBP.

Aaron David Fairbanks

This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

The "world" of a BP is the pattern seen in all examples once the dividing line is removed.

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP, i.e. a BP most naturally has one specific world.

In some cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? Someone seeing all the images together, without a line dividing them, might consider them to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." It is ambiguous: the world could be "triangles and quadrilaterals" or it could be "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is not clear-cut, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily include worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."

This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

The "world" of a BP is the pattern seen in all examples once the dividing line is removed.

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP, i.e. a BP most naturally has one specific world.

However, in many cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? Someone seeing all the images together, without a line dividing them, might consider them to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." It is ambiguous: the world could be "triangles and quadrilaterals" or it could be "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is not clear-cut, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily include worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."

This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

The "world" of a BP is the pattern seen in all examples once the dividing line is removed.

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP, i.e. a BP most naturally has one specific world.

However, in many cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? Someone seeing all the images together, without a line dividing them, might consider them to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." It is ambiguous: the world could be "triangles and quadrilaterals" or it could be "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is ambiguous, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily include worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."

This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

The "world" of a BP is the pattern seen in all examples once the dividing line is removed.

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP, i.e. a BP most naturally has one specific world.

However, in many cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? The fact that all examples shown are triangles and quadrilaterals might indeed make someone seeing all the images together, without a line dividing them, to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." It is ambiguous: the world could be "triangles and quadrilaterals" or it could be "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is ambiguous, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily include worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."

This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

The "world" of a BP is the pattern seen in all examples once the dividing line is removed.

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP. A BP most naturally has one specific world.

However, in many cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? The fact that all examples shown are triangles and quadrilaterals might indeed make someone seeing all the images together, without a line dividing them, to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." It is ambiguous: the world could be "triangles and quadrilaterals" or it could be "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is ambiguous, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily include worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."

This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP. A BP most naturally has one specific world.

However, in many cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? The fact that all examples shown are triangles and quadrilaterals might indeed make someone seeing all the images together, without a line dividing them, to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is ambiguous, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily include worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."

This is the keyword "metaworld" on the OEBP.

Left examples sort all Bongard Problems and thus have "world" Bongard Problems (i.e. fit on left-BP524).

Many BPs are sorted leftly by only one MBP that is a left example for this MMBP. A BP most naturally has one specific world.

However, in many cases it is ambiguous what the most obvious choice of "world" for a BP is.

For example, is the "world" of BP6 "polygons" or "triangles and quadrilaterals"? The fact that all examples shown are triangles and quadrilaterals might indeed make someone seeing all the images together, without the dividing line, to have pattern "triangles and quadrilaterals." Or that specificity might not be considered important enough to mention; the obvious and simple collection both sides fall into is "polygons." In the MBPs about worlds, we will err on the side of inclusion: it is okay to indicate a BP has more than one world if its situation is ambiguous, as in this example.

However, do not arbitrarily include worlds that are too big; the world of BP6 is not "shapes."