Setup and Rule Diagrams

[Katya W]

Hi, question on this one. When I read about the S Not Law, I felt like this was a jump to make at the very beginning of diagramming a question. Although it ends up being a true Not Law, I would never have paid attention to a “random” at the beginning of a game, let alone try to understand it’s possible placements in a setup. From what I’ve read in your book so far (version 2014), randoms don’t need to be worried about until all other variables are filled. They don’t have rules so they come into play after all other variables. As such, I was honestly a little frustrated when I saw this. Could someone please explain why time was taken to suddenly pay attention to a random? Thank you

[Paul Marsh]

Hi katya! Good question.

When you're learning Logic Games, you should be doing a good amount of untimed practice. After writing down all your rules, but before moving onto the questions, you want to be looking for all possible inferences. In untimed practice, there's nothing wrong with taking a lot of time to map out all possible inferences in a game. It can be helpful to look at every single variable and think, "Ok, where can this variable go?" It's a helpful place to start, since you will start to get a feel for the types of rules that can really limit where variables can go (including random variables!). So someone still learning Logic Games could find the Not Law regarding S going 3rd just by taking a good amount of time to think through where each variable could and couldn't go.

Now, a very experienced Logic Gamer isn't going to take the time to think through each variable one by one and map out where they can go. Instead, our experienced Gamer would quickly key in on a couple key inferences here: about P/M going 1/3 or 7/5, and that L/O/N are all tied together. The experienced Gamer would create the "split-block" option diagrammed beautifully in the initial post above, and would find that Option #1 from the "split-block" presents very limited possibilities on what can go in the first four spaces. At that point, the Gamer would briefly explore those options and recognize that S can't go third. Recognizing when to create "split-block" diagrams is a helpful too, but it's something that comes with practice. It often comes up in situations where one of the Rules places a variable in one of two spots (like our first rule here does).

The take-away here is to not be afraid to take a lot of time during untimed practice to map out all the possibilities of where variables can go. Once you become more comfortable with which Rules are very limiting, you'll be able to make setups like "split-block" options and find inferences like the S Not Law more quickly. Hope that helps!

[Katya W]

Hi katya! Good question.

When you're learning Logic Games, you should be doing a good amount of untimed practice. After writing down all your rules, but before moving onto the questions, you want to be looking for all possible inferences. In untimed practice, there's nothing wrong with taking a lot of time to map out all possible inferences in a game. It can be helpful to look at every single variable and think, "Ok, where can this variable go?" It's a helpful place to start, since you will start to get a feel for the types of rules that can really limit where variables can go (including random variables!). So someone still learning Logic Games could find the Not Law regarding S going 3rd just by taking a good amount of time to think through where each variable could and couldn't go.

Now, a very experienced Logic Gamer isn't going to take the time to think through each variable one by one and map out where they can go. Instead, our experienced Gamer would quickly key in on a couple key inferences here: about P/M going 1/3 or 7/5, and that L/O/N are all tied together. The experienced Gamer would create the "split-block" option diagrammed beautifully in the initial post above, and would find that Option #1 from the "split-block" presents very limited possibilities on what can go in the first four spaces. At that point, the Gamer would briefly explore those options and recognize that S can't go third. Recognizing when to create "split-block" diagrams is a helpful too, but it's something that comes with practice. It often comes up in situations where one of the Rules places a variable in one of two spots (like our first rule here does).

The take-away here is to not be afraid to take a lot of time during untimed practice to map out all the possibilities of where variables can go. Once you become more comfortable with which Rules are very limiting, you'll be able to make setups like "split-block" options and find inferences like the S Not Law more quickly. Hope that helps!

Thank you Paul! I appreciate your response. I will keep trying to look for these. I just spent some time slowly going through the problem and can see why the S Not Law could be quickly seen from someone who has an experienced eye for it. Hopefully I’ll get there soon!

[momgoingbacktoschool]

Hi katya! Good question.

When you're learning Logic Games, you should be doing a good amount of untimed practice. After writing down all your rules, but before moving onto the questions, you want to be looking for all possible inferences. In untimed practice, there's nothing wrong with taking a lot of time to map out all possible inferences in a game. It can be helpful to look at every single variable and think, "Ok, where can this variable go?" It's a helpful place to start, since you will start to get a feel for the types of rules that can really limit where variables can go (including random variables!). So someone still learning Logic Games could find the Not Law regarding S going 3rd just by taking a good amount of time to think through where each variable could and couldn't go.

Now, a very experienced Logic Gamer isn't going to take the time to think through each variable one by one and map out where they can go. Instead, our experienced Gamer would quickly key in on a couple key inferences here: about P/M going 1/3 or 7/5, and that L/O/N are all tied together. The experienced Gamer would create the "split-block" option diagrammed beautifully in the initial post above, and would find that Option #1 from the "split-block" presents very limited possibilities on what can go in the first four spaces. At that point, the Gamer would briefly explore those options and recognize that S can't go third. Recognizing when to create "split-block" diagrams is a helpful too, but it's something that comes with practice. It often comes up in situations where one of the Rules places a variable in one of two spots (like our first rule here does).

The take-away here is to not be afraid to take a lot of time during untimed practice to map out all the possibilities of where variables can go. Once you become more comfortable with which Rules are very limiting, you'll be able to make setups like "split-block" options and find inferences like the S Not Law more quickly. Hope that helps!

Thank you Paul! I appreciate your response. I will keep trying to look for these. I just spent some time slowly going through the problem and can see why the S Not Law could be quickly seen from someone who has an experienced eye for it. Hopefully I’ll get there soon!

If you got the two templates and inferred that L/O must go third in the template where P is seventh then you did essentially get the S not law. The two templates of the placement of P_M and M_P basically show you that only M, L, or O can go third which is another way to say that S can't go there.