Search: author:Leo Crabbe
|
|
BP1136 |
| The removal of any one loop disentangles the whole arrangement vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1135 |
| Each component can be assigned its own layer in the arrangement vs. there is no equivalent way of dividing the arrangement into layers. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Put differently, if the examples are imagined to be arrangements of rigid sticks/hoops/etc resting on a flat surface, positive examples include sticks/hoops/etc that could be picked up without disturbing the other objects. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1130 BP1131 BP1132 BP1133 BP1134  *  BP1136 BP1137 BP1138 BP1139 BP1140
|
|
KEYWORD
|
precise
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
|
|
|
|
BP1134 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: impossible vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1133 |
| Impossible to realize in 3D space vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1132 |
| Circle that passes through points is contained within bounding box vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1131 |
| One shape can be totally obscured by the other vs. neither shape can be obscured. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1122 |
| Content of any square is an image of the whole panel vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP1113 |
| Bongard Problems relating to the OEBP vs. Bongard Problems unrelated to the OEBP. |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|