Search: user:Leo Crabbe
|
|
|
|
|
Sort:
recent
Format:
long
Filter:
(all | no meta | meta)
Mode:
(words | no words)
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| BP946 |
| Can be constructed using 2 identical copies of an image (full overlapping not allowed) vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
COMMENTS
|
"Full overlapping not allowed" means you cannot overlay an image onto itself without moving it; if this were allowed all images would be sorted on the left. The copies can be moved around (translated) in 2D but can not be flipped or rotated.
There are examples on the right drawn with thick lines, and these could be created by copying an image with slightly thinner lines and moving it over a tiny amount. If you fix this issue by saying "the copy has to be moved over more than a tiny amount" then the Bongard Problem is perfect but not precise, but if you fix this issue by saying "interpret the figures as made up of (infinitesimally) thin lines" then it's precise but not perfect. - Aaron David Fairbanks, Jun 17 2023 |
|
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP941 BP942 BP943 BP944 BP945  *  BP947 BP948 BP949 BP950 BP951
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
nice, notso, creativeexamples
|
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| BP945 |
| Cube number of dots vs. non-cube number of dots. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| BP942 |
| Square bounding box vs. oblong rectangular bounding box. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| BP941 |
| JPEG image vs. PNG image. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| BP939 |
| Optical illusions vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| BP937 |
| Shapes have equal perimeter vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| BP935 |
| Shapes have equal area vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| BP934 |
| If "distance" is taken to be the sum of horizontal and vertical distances between points, the 3 points are equidistant from each other vs. not so. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
COMMENTS
|
In other words, we take the distance between points (a,b) and (c,d) to be equal to |c-a| + |d-b|, or, in other words, the distance of the shortest path between points that travels along grid lines. In mathematics, this way of measuring distance is called the 'taxicab' or 'Manhattan' metric. The points on the left hand side form equilateral triangles in this metric.
⠀
An alternate (albeit more convoluted) solution that someone may arrive at for this Problem is as follows: The triangles formed by the points on the left have some two points diagonal to each other (in the sense of bishops in chess), and considering the corresponding edge as their base, they also have an equal height. However, this was proven to be equivalent to the Manhattan distance answer by Sridhar Ramesh. Here is the proof:
⠀
An equilateral triangle amounts to points A, B, and C such that B and C lie on a circle of some radius centered at A, and the chord from B to C is as long as this radius.
A Manhattan circle of radius R is a turned square, ♢, where the Manhattan distance between any two points on opposite sides is 2R, and the Manhattan distance between any two points on adjacent sides is the larger distance from one of those points to the corner connecting those sides. Thus, to get two of these points to have Manhattan distance R, one of them must be a midpoint of one side of the ♢ (thus, bishop-diagonal from its center) and the other can then be any point on an adjacent side of the ♢ making an acute triangle with the aforementioned midpoint and center. |
|
|
CROSSREFS
|
Adjacent-numbered pages:
BP929 BP930 BP931 BP932 BP933  *  BP935 BP936 BP937 BP938 BP939
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
hard, allsorted, solved, left-finite, right-finite, perfect, pixelperfect, unorderedtriplet, finishedexamples
|
|
|
CONCEPT
|
triangle (info | search)
|
|
|
WORLD
|
3_dots_on_square_grid [smaller | same | bigger]
|
|
|
AUTHOR
|
Leo Crabbe
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|