Setup and Rule Diagrams

[momgoingbacktoschool]

Hi mom,

Here's just one option for how that's possible (although there are others, all of which involve S passing the virus to a computer, which subsequently passes the virus to another computer):

Screen Shot 2020-09-30 at 5.04.04 PM.png

I know it's possible now after I knew that it was a possible template, but how does one come up with that inference in the first place? Or another way to say it, how would I know to even TRY to do it that way in the first place?

[Jeremy Press]

Hi mom,

Here's just one option for how that's possible (although there are others, all of which involve S passing the virus to a computer, which subsequently passes the virus to another computer):

Screen Shot 2020-09-30 at 5.04.04 PM.png

I know it's possible now after I knew that it was a possible template, but how does one come up with that inference in the first place? Or another way to say it, how would I know to even TRY to do it that way in the first place?

Well, I suppose I'd say it's not an inference so much as it is not making an unwarranted inference. You assumed that the first computer to transmit had to be the one transmitting to R and S. But nothing in the rules says that. Rather, the rule just says that "the computer" (whether it's the first one, the second one, etc.) that transmits to R also transmits to S. Given that the rule doesn't make that the first computer, you have to allow for the possibility that the transmission sequence could extend earlier than that computer. So, it's not a matter of making that "inference" that the sequence could extend earlier. It's a matter of not making the unwarranted inference that the computer transmitting to R and S has to be first. This is a significant challenge in every game. My advice for all games, this one included, is to avoid assuming that something can't happen until you're told explicitly through the rules that it can't.

[momgoingbacktoschool]

Hi mom,

Here's just one option for how that's possible (although there are others, all of which involve S passing the virus to a computer, which subsequently passes the virus to another computer):

Screen Shot 2020-09-30 at 5.04.04 PM.png

I know it's possible now after I knew that it was a possible template, but how does one come up with that inference in the first place? Or another way to say it, how would I know to even TRY to do it that way in the first place?

Well, I suppose I'd say it's not an inference so much as it is not making an unwarranted inference. You assumed that the first computer to transmit had to be the one transmitting to R and S. But nothing in the rules says that. Rather, the rule just says that "the computer" (whether it's the first one, the second one, etc.) that transmits to R also transmits to S. Given that the rule doesn't make that the first computer, you have to allow for the possibility that the transmission sequence could extend earlier than that computer. So, it's not a matter of making that "inference" that the sequence could extend earlier. It's a matter of not making the unwarranted inference that the computer transmitting to R and S has to be first. This is a significant challenge in every game. My advice for all games, this one included, is to avoid assuming that something can't happen until you're told explicitly through the rules that it can't.

This is helpful. Thank you!

[smaani]

On the note of "avoid assuming that something can't happen until you're told explicitly through the rules that it can't.", would someone please confirm that we have no reason not to accept that a computer other than the one giving the virus to S and R, can give the virus to two other computers? Such that there are possibilities where two computers transmit the virus to two other computers? I didn't get the sense I was being tested on this possibility until question #22. Thanks!

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Smaani,

That's correct. The rules as given don't preclude multiple computers from transmitting to two computers. We could theoretically see something like this

U R
U:arrow: S T Q and P

Hope that helps!

[rnolan12]

Hi Powerscore,

Despite reading all of the explanations for this game, I still can't seem to fully grasp the language of the rules. Specifically, I'm stumped by the third rule that states "the computer that transmitted the virus to R also transmitted it to S."

I interpreted this to mean that if R is in the sequence (aka infected by the virus) then S, too, would be infected. I know this isn't a conditional rule, but the way it is phrased made me think that "if R, then S." Clearly this isn't the case according to the correct answer for question 18, but I am still confused as to how R can occur in the sequence without S- if one computer infected both R and S then surely if that initial computer is present then both R and S would be too? So, if someone could clarify what exactly we DO learn from this rule, I'd be really grateful!

Thanks!

[atierney]

Hello,

Ok, I must say from the nature of your question, I think it's probably better to take a step back. Remember that, in the initial paragraph of the game, we're told that every computer receives the virus exactly once. So, if R, then S, wouldn't make sense in terms of indicating which computers from the six are infected with the virus since they all are necessarily infected given the rules of the game.

Now, that being the case, what exactly does it indicate? Well, it indicates that there is one computer from which both R and S got the virus, or if you're diagramming, some computer X, such that

X->R AND S->Y(some computer not X or R)


Now, notice that the other rules designate two things that also help in understanding this set-up: firstly, X can't give to any other computers, since each computer can only give the virus to a maximum of two other computers within the network; secondly, S must give the virus to another computer (R doesn't, necessarily, though), and so S must give to some computer other than X or R, since you can't loop backward in the case of X; if X started with virus, it received the virus from outside the network and R already received the virus from X, the same computer that infected S. Additionally, though it's a little hard to see, R can also infect another computer, not X, Y, or S.

One thing to remember is that this is a linear game of sorts, the rule that allows for a single computer to infect a maximum of two computers means that you could (and do) have the branching effect seen in sequencing games.

Let me know if you have further questions.

[HBaxter]

Given the restrictions, does it make sense to use templates on this game?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Hbaxter,

I wouldn't do templates here. Whenever you do templates, you should have an idea of a few set ways the game could start, and that there would be a clear path from each starting point. We don't have that here. There are many different ways this game can go, and the templates wouldn't likely clarify things very much here.

Hope that helps!