Search: all:new
|
|
BP1159 |
| Bongard Problems where examples are only sorted left if nothing indicates that they would be sorted right vs. vice-versa. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "left-couldbe" on the OEBP.
Right-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "right-couldbe".
In a "couldbe" Bongard Problem, some relevant information is left out by the way objects are displayed. Solutions to "left-couldbe" BPs sound like "Could be a ___ vs. definitely not a ___" (and vice versa for "right-couldbe" BPs.)
To put it in mathematical jargon, there is a "projection" function from objects to pictures, such that objects satisfying property X are mapped to the same picture as objects not satisfying property X. Sorted on the "couldbe" side is the image (under projection) of the collection of objects satisfying property X.
Furthermore, usually X is a relatively narrow criterion, so that most objects do not satisfy it (see keywords left-narrow and right-narrow), and all pictures are in the image (under projection) of the collection of objects not satisfying property X. |
|
REFERENCE
|
Consider BP525, "Cropped image of a circle vs. not so." None of the left-hand examples are definitely an image of a circle, but they fit left because nothing indicates that they are not an image of a circle. A more pedantic solution to this Bongard Problem would be "There is a way of cropping a circle that gives this image vs. there isn't." |
|
CROSSREFS
|
See also the keyword seemslike, where neither side can be confirmed.
Either "left-couldbe" or "right-couldbe" implies notso.
Although the descriptions of "left-couldbe" and "right-couldbe" sound similar to left-unknowable and right-unknowable, they are not the same. It is the difference between a clear absence of information and perpetual uncertainty about whether there is more information to be found.
"Left-couldbe" is usually left-narrow and "right-couldbe" usually right-narrow.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1154 BP1155 BP1156 BP1157 BP1158  *  BP1160 BP1161 BP1162 BP1163 BP1164
|
|
KEYWORD
|
dual, meta (see left/right), links, keyword, side, viceversa
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
BP1157 |
| The order in which the objects in the top half are combined to make the object in the lower half matters vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1155 |
| Shapes are sorted according to a simple rule that uniquely determines where everything goes vs. shapes are sorted according to some other rule (or lack thereof). |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1154 |
| Visual Bongard Problems about Bongard Problems vs. other visual Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1153 |
| Valid multi-sided Bongard Problems vs. invalid multi-sided Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1152 |
| Solution involves discrete quantity vs. solution involves continuous quantity. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1151 |
| Section of the image is a Bongard Problem vs. no section of the image is a Bongard Problem. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
Welcome |
Solve |
Browse |
Lookup |
Recent |
Links |
Register |
Contact
Contribute |
Keywords |
Concepts |
Worlds |
Ambiguities |
Transformations |
Invalid Problems |
Style Guide |
Goals |
Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|