Search: supworld:linksbp
|
|
BP794 |
| Meta Bongard Problems that can contain an infinite chain of Bongard Problems containing Bongard Problems vs. this can never happen. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP800 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: golden ratio vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP804 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: vertical vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP807 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: direction vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP808 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: flow of liquid vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP817 |
| Bongard Problems with solution relating to concept: cross section vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP819 |
| Allocated for user. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP821 |
| Impossible Bongard Problems vs. possible Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP837 |
| 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. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
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. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
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.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP832 BP833 BP834 BP835 BP836  *  BP838 BP839 BP840 BP841 BP842
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, keyword
|
|
WORLD
|
bp [smaller | same | bigger]
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP857 |
| Bongard Problems with solution relating to concept: collision of objects vs. Bongard Problems unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Welcome |
Solve |
Browse |
Lookup |
Recent |
Links |
Register |
Contact
Contribute |
Keywords |
Concepts |
Worlds |
Ambiguities |
Transformations |
Invalid Problems |
Style Guide |
Goals |
Glossary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|