Search: subworld:everything
|
|
BP1139 |
| Bongard Problems where, given any example, there is a way to add details to it (without erasing) such that it is sorted on the other side vs. BPs where this is not the case. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
This classification is specifically concerned with changes to examples that leave them sortable, as there are almost always ways of adding details to a BP's examples that make them unsortable.
Right-sorted BPs in this Bongard Problem are often Bongard Problems where there is always a way of adding to left-sorted examples to make them right-sorted, but not the other way around, or vice versa.
Another version of this Bongard Problem could be made about adding white (erasure of detail) instead of black (addition of detail).
Another version could be made about adding either white or black, but not both.
Where appropriate, you can assume all images will have some room in a lip of white background around the border (ignoring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox ).
You can't expand the boundary of an image as you add detail to it. If image boundaries could be expanded, then any shape could be shrunken to a point in relation to the surrounding whiteness, which could then be filled in to make any other shape.
How should this treat cases in which just a few examples can't be added to at all (like an all-black box)? E.g. BP966. Should this be sorted right (should the one special case of a black box spoil it) or should it be sorted left (should examples that can't at all be further added be discounted)? Maybe we should only sort BPs in which all examples can be further added to. (See BP1143left.) - Aaron David Fairbanks, Nov 12 2021
Is "addition of detail" context-dependent, or does it just mean any addition of blackness to the image? Say you have a points-and-lines Bongard Problem like BP1100, and you're trying to decide whether to sort it left or right here. You would just want to think about adding more points and lines to the picture. You don't want to get bogged down in thinking about whether black could be added to the image in a weird way so that a point gets turned into a line, or something. - Aaron David Fairbanks, Nov 13 2021 |
|
CROSSREFS
|
See BP1139 for Bongard Problems in which no example can be added to, period.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1134 BP1135 BP1136 BP1137 BP1138  *  BP1140 BP1141 BP1142 BP1143 BP1144
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, sideless
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
|
|
|
|
BP1140 |
| Bongard Problems where there is a way of adding details to some example (without erasing) that would sort it on the other side vs. Bongard Problems where there is no way of adding details to examples that would sort them on the other side. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
This classification is specifically concerned with changes to examples that leave them sortable, as there are almost always ways of adding details to a BP's examples that make them unsortable.
Another version of this Bongard Problem could be made about adding white (erasure of detail) instead of black (addition of detail).
Another version could be made about adding either white or black, but not both. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Closely related to gap Problems and stable Problems.
Bongard Problems tagged finishedexamples will fit right.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1135 BP1136 BP1137 BP1138 BP1139  *  BP1141 BP1142 BP1143 BP1144 BP1145
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, sideless, invariance
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
|
|
|
|
BP1142 |
| Bongard Problems where there is no way to turn an example into any other sorted example by adding black OR white (not both) vs. Bongard Problems where some example can be altered in this way and remain sorted. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted problems have the keyword "finishedexamples" on the OEBP.
The addition does not have to be slight.
Left-sorted Problems usually have a very specific collection of examples, where the only images sorted all show the same type of object.
Any Bongard Problem where all examples are one shape outline will be sorted left, and (almost) any Bongard Problem where all examples are one fill shape will be sorted right. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
See BP1144 for the version about both additions and erasures, and only slight changes are considered.
See BP1167 for a stricter version, the condition that all examples have the same amount of black and white.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1137 BP1138 BP1139 BP1140 BP1141  *  BP1143 BP1144 BP1145 BP1146 BP1147
|
|
KEYWORD
|
unwordable, notso, meta (see left/right), links, keyword, sideless, problemkiller
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
|
|
|
|
BP1143 |
| Bongard Problems where a visual addition (not erasing) can be made to any example such that it would still fit in the Bongard Problem vs. Bongard Problems where some example(s) are "maximal" (cannot be added to). |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1144 |
| Bongard Problems where making any small change to any sorted example renders the example unsortable vs. other Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1150 |
| Even BP number on the OEBP vs. odd BP number on the OEBP. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
This was created as an example for BP1073 (left-it versus right-it). |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1145 BP1146 BP1147 BP1148 BP1149  *  BP1151 BP1152 BP1153 BP1154 BP1155
|
|
KEYWORD
|
less, meta (see left/right), links, oebp, example, left-self, presentationmatters, right-it, experimental, left-listable, right-listable
|
|
CONCEPT
|
even_odd (info | search)
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP1152 |
| Solution involves discrete quantity vs. solution involves continuous quantity. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1153 |
| Valid multi-sided Bongard Problems vs. invalid multi-sided Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1154 |
| Visual Bongard Problems about Bongard Problems vs. other visual Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
Welcome |
Solve |
Browse |
Lookup |
Recent |
Links |
Register |
Contact
Contribute |
Keywords |
Concepts |
Worlds |
Ambiguities |
Transformations |
Invalid Problems |
Style Guide |
Goals |
Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|