Search: ex:BP979
|
Displaying 1-7 of 7 results found.
|
page 1
|
|
Sort:
id
Format:
long
Filter:
(all | no meta | meta)
Mode:
(words | no words)
|
|
|
|
|
BP503 |
| "Nice" Bongard Problems vs. Bongard Problems the OEBP does not need more like. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP789 |
| Bongard Problems in which all examples have the same format, a specific multi-part structure vs. other Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left examples have the keyword "structure" on the OEBP.
Examples of "structures": Bongard Problem, Bongard Problem with extra unsorted panel ("Bongard's Dozen"), 4-panel analogy grid, sequence of objects with a quantity changing by a constant amount.
If the solver hasn't become familiar with the featured structure, the Bongard Problem's solution may seem convoluted or inelegant. (See keyword assumesfamiliarity.) Once the solver gets used to seeing a particular structure it becomes easier to read that structure and solve Bongard Problems featuring it.
A Bongard Problem can non-verbally teach someone how a particular structure works, showing valid examples of that structure versus non-examples. E.g., BP968 for the structure of Bongard Problems and BP981 for the structure of analogy grids. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP784 BP785 BP786 BP787 BP788  *  BP790 BP791 BP792 BP793 BP794
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, keyword
|
|
WORLD
|
bp [smaller | same | bigger]
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP867 |
| Bongard Problem with solution that can be naturally expressed as "___ vs. not so" vs. not so. |
|
| | | BP6
| | Qat | blimp | notso |
|
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted BPs have the keyword "notso" on the OEBP.
This meta Bongard Problem is about Bongard Problems featuring two rules that are conceptual opposites.
Sometimes both sides could be seen as the "not" side: consider, for example, two definitions of the same Bongard Problem, "shape has hole vs. does not" and "shape is not filled vs. is". It is possible (albeit perhaps unnatural) to phrase the solution either way when the left and right sides partition all possible relevant examples cleanly into two groups (see the allsorted keyword).
When one property is "positive-seeming" and its opposite is "negative-seeming", it usually means the positive property would be recognized without counter-examples (e.g. a collection of triangles will be seen as such), while the negative property wouldn't be recognized without counter-examples (e.g. a collection of "non-triangle shapes" will just be interpreted as "shapes" unless triangles are shown opposite them).
BP513 (keyword left-narrow) is about Bongard Problems whose left side can be recognized without the right side. When a Bongard Problem is left-narrow and not "right-narrow that usually makes the property on the left seem positive and the property on the right seem negative.
The OEBP by convention has preferred the "positive-seeming" property (when there is one) to be on the left side.
All in all, the keyword "notso" should mean:
1) If the Bongard Problem is "narrow" on at least one side, then it is left-narrow.
2) The right side is the conceptual negation of the left side.
If a Bongard Problem's solution is "[Property A] vs. not so", the "not so" side is everything without [Property A] within some suitable context. A Bongard Problem "triangles vs. not so" might only include simple shapes as non-triangles; it need not include images of boats as non-triangles. It is not necessary for all the kitchen sink to be thrown on the "not so" side (although it is here). |
|
CROSSREFS
|
See BP1001 for a version sorting pictures of Bongard Problems (miniproblems) instead of links to pages on the OEBP. (This version is a little different. In BP1001, the kitchen sink of all other possible images is always included on the right "not so" side, rather than a context-dependent conceptual negation.)
Contrast keyword viceversa.
"[Property A] vs. not so" Bongard Problems are often allsorted, meaning they sort all relevant examples--but not always, because sometimes there exist ambiguous border cases, unclear whether they fit [Property A] or not.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP862 BP863 BP864 BP865 BP866  *  BP868 BP869 BP870 BP871 BP872
|
|
KEYWORD
|
notso, meta (see left/right), links, keyword, left-self, funny
|
|
WORLD
|
everything [smaller | same] zoom in left
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP916 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: convey enough information vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP980 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: choice vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1158 |
| Bongard Problems in which each example communicates a rule vs. other Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "rules" on the OEBP.
In the typical "rules" Bongard Problem, it is possible to come up with many convoluted rules that fit each example, but the intended interpretation is the only simple and obvious one.
Since it is difficult to communicate a rule with little detail, "rules" Bongard Problems are usually infodense.
Typically, each example is itself a bunch of smaller examples that all obey the rule. It is the same as how a Bongard Problems relies on many examples to communicate rules; likely just one example wouldn't get the answer across.
On the other hand, in BP1157 for example, each intended rule is communicated by just one example; these rules have to be particularly simple and intuitive, and the individual examples have to be complicated enough to communicate them.
Often, each rule is communicated by showing several examples of things satisfying it. (See keywords left-narrow and right-narrow.) Contrast Bongard Problems, which are more communicative, by showing some examples satisfying the rule and some examples NOT satisfying the rule.
A "rules" Bongard Problem is often collective. Some examples may admit multiple equally plausible rules, and the correct interpretation of each example only becomes clear once the solution is known. The group of examples together improve the solver's confidence about having understood each individual one right.
It is common that there will be one or two examples with multiple reasonable interpretations due to oversight of the author. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
All meta Bongard Problems are "rules" Bongard Problems.
Many other Bongard-Problem-like structures seen on the OEBP are also about recognizing a pattern. (See keyword structure.)
"Rules" Bongard Problems are abstract, although the individual rules in them may not be abstract. "Rules" Bongard Problems also usually have the keyword creativeexamples.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1153 BP1154 BP1155 BP1156 BP1157  *  BP1159 BP1160 BP1161 BP1162 BP1163
|
|
KEYWORD
|
fuzzy, meta (see left/right), links, keyword, left-self, rules
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP1180 |
| Bongard Problems where every example establishes its own distinct "world" of allowed objects vs. Bongard Problems where every example pulls from the same set of allowed objects. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted Problems have the keyword "miniworlds" on the OEBP.
All examples in this Problem are visual Bongard Problems with multiple objects in most panels. This is key as an intuitive set of allowable objects needs to be communicated by any one sorted image.
There is a decent degree of overlap between rules and "miniworlds", but BP1049 is an example of a "miniworlds" problem where the rule is constant across examples, and BP1155 is an example of a "rules" Problem that would not be tagged "miniworlds".
Although this Problem does sort any BP whose examples are images of Bongard Problems left, it is probably best not to consider them to avoid clutter and more unnecessary keywords being attached to them. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1175 BP1176 BP1177 BP1178 BP1179  *  BP1181 BP1182 BP1183 BP1184 BP1185
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, keyword
|
|
WORLD
|
visualbp [smaller | same | bigger]
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
|
|
|
Welcome |
Solve |
Browse |
Lookup |
Recent |
Links |
Register |
Contact
Contribute |
Keywords |
Concepts |
Worlds |
Ambiguities |
Transformations |
Invalid Problems |
Style Guide |
Goals |
Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|