Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP575 BP576 BP577 BP578 BP579  *  BP581 BP582 BP583 BP584 BP585

meta (see left/right), links, metaconcept, primitive

bp [smaller | same | bigger]

Harry E. Foundalis

Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP610 BP611 BP612 BP613 BP614  *  BP616 BP617 BP618 BP619 BP620

meta (see left/right), links, metaconcept, primitive

bp [smaller | same | bigger]

Harry E. Foundalis

Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP689 BP690 BP691 BP692 BP693  *  BP695 BP696 BP697 BP698 BP699

meta (see left/right), links, metaconcept, primitive

bp [smaller | same | bigger]

Harry E. Foundalis

Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP764 BP765 BP766 BP767 BP768  *  BP770 BP771 BP772 BP773 BP774

meta (see left/right), links, metaconcept

bp [smaller | same | bigger]

Harry E. Foundalis

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "consistentsymbols" on the OEBP.

A most extreme "consistentsymbols" Bongard Problem is BP121: the solution is about codes consistently symbolizing objects. However, "consistentsymbols" Bongard Problems may have solution unrelated to the symbolism; the symbolism may just be implicit, e.g. always meaning dots as numbers, always meaning stacked dots as fractions, repeatedly using the same simple drawings as shorthand to represent platonic solids. Most BPs have some symbolism in this sense; a Bongard Problem should only be labelled "consistentsymbols" if there is a relatively high amount of varied symbolism, particularly if it is visual symbolism not all people would naturally understand.

A Bongard Problem featuring a real language would be another extreme example of "consistentsymbols".

A Bongard Problem with many varied images meant to be interpreted in unique ways is not necessarily "consistentsymbols," since there is no specific-to-this-Bongard-Problem vocabulary of symbols that must be known to understand it. (Even so, some might say that how people intuitively interpret images is a vocabulary on its own.)

Sometimes, the symbolism isn't an important part of the Bongard Problem, and it just helps make the Bongard Problem easier to read (see the help keyword). For example, a Bongard Problem may include many clumps of dots, and the solution of the Problem may have to do with counting the number of dots in each clump; the Bongard Problem might build up a symbolic context by always arranging each number of dots in a consistent way (e.g. how they conventionally appear on dice faces).

"Consistentsymbols" is related to the keyword structure, a format that all examples fit that the solver needs to know how to read. In "consistentsymbols" Bongard Problems, not all examples need to fit a rigid format; instead there may be various smaller structures of meaning that only appear in some examples.

"Consistentsymbols" is related to assumesfamiliarity, BPs that require the solver to take certain assumptions about what the examples are for the solution to seem simple. A "consistentsymbols" Bongard Problem may have a very convoluted solution that involves explaining the meaning of each appearing object; however, the solution can become simple given correct interpretations of all objects. This effect works best when each object must be interpreted the same way across all boxes in order for the simple solution to fit. The comments sections of "consistentsymbols" BP pages on the OEBP ought to explain the symbolism used.

Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP833 BP834 BP835 BP836 BP837  *  BP839 BP840 BP841 BP842 BP843

meta (see left/right), links, keyword, wellfounded

visualbp [smaller | same | bigger]

Aaron David Fairbanks

Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "arbitrary" on the OEBP.

Arbitrary BPs often communicate non-arbitrary ideas. M. M. Bongard's original "A vs. Б" Problem (BP100) is about recognizing letters. A choice of some such arbitrary letters was necessary.

Most Bongard Problems are at least slightly arbitrary. Almost any Bongard Problem could be changed in a number of ways to make slightly different Bongard Problems. When a Bongard Problem is labeled as "arbitrary", that means there is one especially obvious class of similar Bongard Problems, with none of them particularly more interesting or special than any other.

The self-referential (invalid) Bongard Problems BP538, BP545, BP902, BP1073 fit this definition (the solution involves the arbitrary detail of being that specific Bongard Problem instead of any other). On the other hand, the solution idea is not arbitrary when phrased with "this Bongard Problem".

Many "arbitrary" Bongard Problems are of the form "Detail X has arbitrary value A vs. not so" or "Detail X has arbitrary value A vs. detail X has arbitrary value B". Other "arbitrary" Bongard Problems feature arbitrary details that are not the distinction between the sides, e.g. BP545.

It is unclear whether or not we should label a Bongard Problem "arbitrary" if the arbitrarily fixed detail is a notable special case. For example, BP1024 could have been made using any number, but the number 1 is a non-arbitrary number, so the Bongard Problem does not seem so arbitrary.

Similar to thespecificity concept BP (BP773), which is more general, including Bongard Problems relating conceptually in any way to arbitrary specificity.

Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP945 BP946 BP947 BP948 BP949  *  BP951 BP952 BP953 BP954 BP955

meta (see left/right), links, keyword, right-self, sideless

bp [smaller | same | bigger]

Aaron David Fairbanks

Alternatively, BP pages on the OEBP with number less than or equal to 394 vs. other BP pages.

https://www.foundalis.com/res/bps/bpidx.htm

Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1189 BP1190 BP1191 BP1192 BP1193  *  BP1195 BP1196 BP1197 BP1198 BP1199

Foundalis's collection includes all Bongard Problems by Bongard.

meta (see left/right), links, right-self, time

Aaron David Fairbanks