Collective implies @fuzzy.

Collective Bongard Problems are often @abstract".

@Subjective Bongard Problems are often collective.

In some Bongard Problems, each example has a corresponding slightly different twin example on the other side (keyword @contributepairs), and it is necessary to see both examples together in order to be able to sort either of them. This is related to "collective" but not quite the same. It becomes unambiguous where an example fits once its twin is seen.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though a stretch of an argument could conceivably be made for each one fitting on the other side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right. This is common in @rules Bongard Problems), where each example communicates its own rule.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline @invalid Bongard Problems (see https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

Collective implies @fuzzy.Collective Bongard Problems are often "abstract" (left-BP512). "Subjective" Bongard Problems (left-BP520) are often collective.

In some Bongard Problems, each example has a corresponding slightly different twin example on the other side (keyword "contributepairs" left-BP919), and it is necessary to see both examples together in order to be able to sort either of them. This is related to "collective" but not quite the same. It becomes unambiguous where an example fits once its twin is seen.

Collective implies "fuzzy" (right-BP508). Collective Bongard Problems are often "abstract" (left-BP512). "Subjective" Bongard Problems (left-BP520) are often collective.

In some Bongard Problems, each example has a corresponding slightly different twin example on the other side (keyword "contributepairs" left-BP919), and it is necessary to see both examples together in order to be able to sort either of them. This is related to "collective" but not quite the same. It becomes unambiguous where an example fits once its twin is seen.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though a stretch of an argument could conceivably be made for each one fitting on the other side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right. This is common in "rules" Bongard Problems (left-BP1158), where each example communicates its own rule.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

Collective implies "fuzzy" (right-BP508). Collective Bongard Problems are often "abstract" (left-BP512). "Subjective" Bongard Problems (left-BP520) are often collective.

In some Bongard Problems, each example has a corresponding slightly different twin example on the other side (keyword "contributepairs" left-BP919), and it is necessary to see both examples together in order to be able to sort either of them. This is related to "collective" but not quite the same, since it becomes unambiguous where an example fits once its twin is seen.

Collective implies "fuzzy" (right-BP508). Collective Bongard Problems are often "abstract" (left-BP512). "Subjective" Bongard Problems (left-BP520) are often collective.

In some Bongard Problems, each example has a corresponding slightly different twin example on the other side (keyword "contributepairs" left-BP919), and it is necessary to see both examples together in order to be able to sort either of them. This is related to "collective", but not quite the same, since it becomes unambiguous where an example fits once its twin is seen.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though a stretch of an argument could conceivably be made for each one fitting on the other side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though there is no explicit rule and a stretch of an argument can be made for each one fitting on the other side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though there is no explicit rule and a stretch of an argument can be made for it fitting on the other side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though there is no explicit rule and a stretched argument might be made for either side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though there is no explicit rule and an argument might be made for either side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though there is no explicit rule, and an argument might be made for either side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, and the correct choice of interpretation is only clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though there is no explicit rule, and an argument might be made for either side.

In some collective Bongard Problems, each example admits a number of possible interpretations, but the correct choice of interpretation is clear once the solution is known. The group of examples all together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.

Collective Bongard Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Some Bongard Problems are "collective" in a more extreme way than others. Perhaps there are absolutely no individual examples that anyone would confidently sort on either side, and the solver can only be expected to get a vague gist by seeing them all together. Or perhaps in practice most people agree about where most examples should fit, even though there is no explicit rule, and an argument might be made for either side.

Collective Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

Collective implies "fuzzy" (right-BP508). Collective Bongard Problems are often "abstract" (left-BP512). "Subjective" Bongard Problems (left-BP520) are often collective.

Bongard Problems in which individual examples may be unclearly sorted (it may be arguable which side they should go on) but many examples together are still able to communicate the solution vs. other Bongard Problems.

Bongard Problems in which some individual examples are unclearly sorted (it may be arguable which side they should go on) but many examples together are still able to communicate the solution vs. other Bongard Problems.

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

Collective Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Collective Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https:// www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Collective Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php ). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.

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

Collective Problems are borderline "invalid" Bongard Problems (see left-BP522 and https://www.oebp.org/invalid.php). There is no one rule dividing the sides; the solution is not a method to determine whether an arbitrary example fits left or right. It is a less strict kind of Bongard Problem.