Search: ex:BP553
|
Displaying 1-7 of 7 results found.
|
page 1
|
|
Sort:
id
Format:
long
Filter:
(all | no meta | meta)
Mode:
(words | no words)
|
|
|
|
|
BP518 |
| Keywords on the OEBP vs. other Bongard Problem pages. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP537 |
| Meta Bongard Problems vs. other Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP566 |
| Meta Bongard Problems of the form "[transformation] applied to some examples switch their sorting vs. sorting is invariant under [transformation]" vs. other meta Bongard Problems. |
|
| |
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted Bongard Problems have the keyword "invariance" on the OEBP.
Bongard Problems labelled "invariance" are usually (but not always) about transformations that can be undone by other transformations of the same class. (The technical term for this kind of transformation is an "isomorphism".)
When the transformations used in a "invariance" Bongard Problem vary continuously, there could usually be made a corresponding stability Bongard Problem. Stability Bongard Problems are like "invariance" Bongard Problems but for arbitrarily small applications of [transformation] affecting examples' sorting.
Potentially, stability Bongard Problems could be considered "invariance" Bongard Problems. On one hand, they are different, since checking whether arbitrarily small transformations switch an example's sorting is different from checking whether a particular transformation switches an example's sorting; the former is infinitely many conditions. On the other hand, there is actually only finitely much detail in any of the examples, and in practice a stability Bongard Problem generally just amounts to "a small application of [transformation] switches an example's sorting vs. not".
(The keyword gap is another example of a Bongard Problem currently labelled with "invariance" that arguably does not technically fit.)
Also, dependence Bongard Problems could be considered "invariance" Bongard Problems, where the relevant kind of transformation is swapping the example out for any other example that shares the relevant property. |
|
CROSSREFS
|
"Invariance" Bongard Problems are notso Bongard Problems.
"Invariance" Bongard Problems are often keywords (keyword keyword) on the OEBP.
See keyword problemkiller, which is about transformations making all sorted examples unsortable.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP561 BP562 BP563 BP564 BP565  *  BP567 BP568 BP569 BP570 BP571
|
|
KEYWORD
|
meta (see left/right), links, keyword, metameta
|
|
WORLD
|
linksbp [smaller | same | bigger]
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
|
|
|
BP794 |
| Meta Bongard Problems that can contain an infinite chain of Bongard Problems containing Bongard Problems vs. this can never happen. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
BP867 |
| Bongard Problem with solution that can be naturally expressed as "___ vs. not so" vs. not so. |
|
| | | BP6
 |  | Qat | blimp | notso |
|
|
|
COMMENTS
|
Left-sorted BPs have the keyword "notso" on the OEBP.
This meta Bongard Problem is about Bongard Problems featuring two rules that are conceptual opposites.
Sometimes both sides could be seen as the "not" side: consider, for example, two definitions of the same Bongard Problem, "shape has hole vs. does not" and "shape is not filled vs. is". It is possible (albeit perhaps unnatural) to phrase the solution either way when the left and right sides partition all possible relevant examples cleanly into two groups (see the allsorted keyword).
When one property is "positive-seeming" and its opposite is "negative-seeming", it usually means the positive property would be recognized without counter-examples (e.g. a collection of triangles will be seen as such), while the negative property wouldn't be recognized without counter-examples (e.g. a collection of "non-triangle shapes" will just be interpreted as "shapes" unless triangles are shown opposite them).
BP513 (keyword left-narrow) is about Bongard Problems whose left side can be recognized without the right side. When a Bongard Problem is left-narrow and not "right-narrow that usually makes the property on the left seem positive and the property on the right seem negative.
The OEBP by convention has preferred the "positive-seeming" property (when there is one) to be on the left side.
All in all, the keyword "notso" should mean:
1) If the Bongard Problem is "narrow" on at least one side, then it is left-narrow.
2) The right side is the conceptual negation of the left side.
If a Bongard Problem's solution is "[Property A] vs. not so", the "not so" side is everything without [Property A] within some suitable context. A Bongard Problem "triangles vs. not so" might only include simple shapes as non-triangles; it need not include images of boats as non-triangles. It is not necessary for all the kitchen sink to be thrown on the "not so" side (although it is here). |
|
CROSSREFS
|
See BP1001 for a version sorting pictures of Bongard Problems (miniproblems) instead of links to pages on the OEBP. (This version is a little different. In BP1001, the kitchen sink of all other possible images is always included on the right "not so" side, rather than a context-dependent conceptual negation.)
Contrast keyword viceversa.
"[Property A] vs. not so" Bongard Problems are often allsorted, meaning they sort all relevant examples--but not always, because sometimes there exist ambiguous border cases, unclear whether they fit [Property A] or not.
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP862 BP863 BP864 BP865 BP866  *  BP868 BP869 BP870 BP871 BP872
|
|
KEYWORD
|
notso, meta (see left/right), links, keyword, left-self, funny
|
|
WORLD
|
everything [smaller | same] zoom in left
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Aaron David Fairbanks
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|