Search: +ex:BP393
|
Displaying 1-10 of 10 results found.
|
page 1
|
|
Sort:
id
Format:
long
Filter:
(all | no meta | meta)
Mode:
(words | no words)
|
|
|
|
|
BP503 |
| "Nice" Bongard Problems vs. Bongard Problems the OEBP does not need more like. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP512 |
| Abstract Bongard Problems vs. concrete visual Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP600 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: categorization vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP709 |
| Bongard Problem with solution relating to concept: true, correct / false, incorrect vs. Bongard Problem unrelated to this concept. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
BP919 |
| BP Pages on the OEBP where users are advised to upload left examples and right examples in pairs vs. other BP Pages. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left examples have the keyword "contributepairs" on the OEBP.
When this keyword is added to a Problem, OEBP users are advised to add a corresponding right example for every left example they add and vice versa.
It is common for Bongard Problems to present left examples on the left side and corresponding altered versions of those examples on the right side, tweaked only slightly, to highlight the difference and make the solution easier to see (see keyword help).
This is common in more abstract Bongard Problems that admit a wide range of examples, a variety of different styles or types (e.g. BP360). Showing two versions of the same thing, one on the left and one on the right, helps a person interpret what that thing is meant to be in the context of the Bongard Problem; whatever qualities vary between the two in the pair must be relevant.
If a person cannot sort an example according to the solution property without seeing its corresponding opposite example, the Bongard Problem is invalid (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. See also Bongard Problems with the keyword collective, which are similarly borderline-invalid.
A BP in which each left example corresponds to a right example and vice versa could be remade as a Bongard Problem in which the left examples are the pairs. For example BP360 would turn into "a pair consisting of the ordered version of something and the chaotic version of the same thing vs. a pair of things not satisfying this relationship." This process would turn a Bongard Problem that is invalid in the sense described above into a valid one.
(See keyword orderedpair.)
In some "contributepairs" Bongard Problems there really is a natural choice of left version for every right example and vice versa (see keyword dual); in others the choice is artificially imposed by the Bongard Problem creator.
When "contributepairs" Bongard Problems are laid out in the format with a grid of boxes on either side of a dividing line, the boxes may be arranged so as to highlight the correspondence: either
A B | A B
E F | E F
G H | G H
or
A B | B A
E F | F E
G H | H G. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP914 BP915 BP916 BP917 BP918  *  BP920 BP921 BP922 BP923 BP924
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, keyword, oebp, right-self, instruction
|
|
WORLD
|
bppage [smaller | same | bigger] zoom in left (correspondence_bp)
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
BP1180 |
| Bongard Problems where every example establishes its own distinct "world" of allowed objects vs. Bongard Problems where every example pulls from the same set of allowed objects. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted Problems have the keyword "miniworlds" on the OEBP.
All examples in this Problem are visual Bongard Problems with multiple objects in most panels. This is key as an intuitive set of allowable objects needs to be communicated by any one sorted image.
There is a decent degree of overlap between rules and "miniworlds", but BP1049 is an example of a "miniworlds" problem where the rule is constant across examples, and BP1155 is an example of a "rules" Problem that would not be tagged "miniworlds".
Although this Problem does sort any BP whose examples are images of Bongard Problems left, it is probably best not to consider them to avoid clutter and more unnecessary keywords being attached to them. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP1175 BP1176 BP1177 BP1178 BP1179  *  BP1181 BP1182 BP1183 BP1184 BP1185
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, keyword
|
|
WORLD
|
visualbp [smaller | same | bigger]
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|