The simplest rule explaining the 3 example input-output pairs would make the output corresponding to the test input depend on squares out of bounds of the test input.
To fix you can have some rule like have the reflection axis be shifted from the center by one in the direction of the light blue “readout” rectangle (instead of fixed at one to the right from the center) or have the reflection axis be centered, and have a 2-square shift in a direction depending on which side of center is the readout rectangle (instead of in a fixed direction), but that seems strictly more complicated.
Alternatively, you could have some rule about wraparound, or e.g. using white squares if out of bounds, but what rule to use for out of bounds squares isn’t determined from the example input-output pairs given.
Problem 2 seems badly formulated becauseThe simplest rule explaining the 3 example input-output pairs would make the output corresponding to the test input depend on squares out of bounds of the test input.To fix you can have some rule like have the reflection axis be shifted from the center by one in the direction of the light blue “readout” rectangle (instead of fixed at one to the right from the center) or have the reflection axis be centered, and have a 2-square shift in a direction depending on which side of center is the readout rectangle (instead of in a fixed direction), but that seems strictly more complicated.Alternatively, you could have some rule about wraparound, or e.g. using white squares if out of bounds, but what rule to use for out of bounds squares isn’t determined from the example input-output pairs given.Edit: whoops, see Fabien Roger’s comment and my reply.
See also discussion here.