Rule diagramming

[cpando1995@gmail.com]

Hi,

Is there a difference in meaning/diagramming between the following two rules:

If A, then not B


A and B cannot occur together



Thank you

[Adam Tyson]

In one sense, cpando, those are identical in meaning. The first version is conditional, telling us that when one is in, the other is out, and we might diagram that as A B and read that as "not both". That allows for A to be selected, or B, or neither, but not both. This approach is most commonly found in grouping games that have just one group, the "selected" group (and there is an implied second group, the "unselected" or "out" group).

In a game with multiple groups, especially where all the variables are to be distributed among the groups, you would be more likely to see wording closer to the second example, where they cannot be in the same group even though both are "in" and among those selected. In that case, you would be more likely to put them in a block and cross it out, aka a "not-block", to demonstrate that they cannot be in the same group as each other.

I've used double-not-arrows in multi-group games when the blocks seemed awkward (such as a block of two that are together but which cannot, as a block, be with a third thing - it's hard to do a not-block that is partially a yes-block), so the use of the two diagramming tools is not exclusive to one or the other type of game. Choose the diagram that makes the most sense to you under the circumstances, and you'll be fine.

[cpando1995@gmail.com]

I see how the two could be represented differently depending on the game type and it's great to know that they're also interchangeable. Thanks for the promptly response; it's been of much help.