"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those groups.

All left and right examples should show a collection of parts that all follow a clear pattern. EX8210 (sorted as ambiguous above) doesn't obey this: the whole does satisfy the pattern shown by most of its parts, but not ALL the parts satisfy that pattern.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those smaller groups.

All left and right examples should show a collection of parts that all follow a clear pattern. EX8210 (sorted as ambiguous above) doesn't obey this: the whole does satisfy the pattern shown by most of its parts, but not ALL the parts satisfy that pattern.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those smaller groups.

All left and right examples should show a collection of parts that all follow a clear pattern. EX8210 (sorted as ambiguous above) doesn't obey this: the whole does satisfy the pattern shown by most of its parts, but not all the parts satisfy that rule.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those smaller groups.

All left and right examples should show a collection of parts that all follow a clear pattern. EX8210 (sorted as ambiguous above) doesn't follow this: the whole does satisfy the pattern shown by most of its parts, but not all the parts satisfy that rule.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those smaller groups.

All left and right examples should feature a set of parts that all follow a clear pattern. EX8210 (sorted as ambiguous above) doesn't follow this: the whole does satisfy the pattern shown by most of its parts, but not all the parts satisfy that rule.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those smaller groups.

All left and right examples should feature a set of parts that has a clear pattern between them. EX8210 (sorted as ambiguous above) doesn't follow this: the whole does satisfy the pattern shown by most of its parts, but not all the parts satisfy that rule.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those smaller groups.

All left and right examples should feature a set of parts that has a clear pattern between them. EX8210 seems ambiguous because it doesn't follow this: the whole does satisfy the pattern shown by most of its parts, but not all the parts satisfy that rule.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

The whole satisfies the pattern shown by its parts vs. not so.

"Parts" are the largest obviously separable things. Some examples show a group of separated smaller groups, and in those cases a "part" means one of those smaller groups.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

The whole satisfies the pattern shared between each of its parts vs. not so.

The whole satisfies the pattern shared between all its parts vs. not so.

The whole satisfies the pattern shared by all its parts vs. not so.

The whole satisfies the pattern shared between all its parts vs. not so.

It is not clear where the group of left examples of this Problem would be sorted by this Problem. The question is whether these examples considered together satisfy the pattern that all the parts do, namely that the whole satisfies the pattern that all the parts do.

Aaron David Fairbanks