Setup and Rule Diagrams

[Dave Killoran]

Setup and Rule Diagram Explanation

This is a Pure Sequencing game.

The game scenario establishes the following basic setup:

PT52-Sept2007_LGE-G1_srd1.png

The five rules can be combined to create the following sequence:

PT52-Sept2007_LGE-G1_srd2.png

As with all sequences, consider which variables can be first, and which variables could be last:

G, K, P, or N could be first.

Only I or L could be last. This information makes question #4 quite easy.

[cboles]

Very stumped by this game. I don't feel like I set this game up right and am still not sure how some of the correct answers are correct.

Take for example question #3. I selected answer C based off the fact that P>H>O>G>L there are simply not enough spaces left.

Or #4. I chose G based off the fact that O,H,P,N, and K all have to be before G (or at least that is how I read the problem).

Obviously I am missing the point here with this problem...where am I misinterpreting rules?

[Dave Killoran]

Hi C,

Thanks for the question! I think I can see the source of your frustration in your explanation for #3 (and thank you very much for providing your thoughts here—it really helps us when we can see what students were thinking when they ran into difficulty!). You mentioned the "P>H>O>G>L" lineup of variables, but that line assumes that O is always opened before G, and that is not something we know for sure. From the third rule, we know that L is opened after G, so the relationship there is G L (or G > L in our old Sequencing diagramming system). However, that allows G to "float" in front of L, and allows G a wide range of movement. From the rules, for example, G could be anywhere from the first valve opened all the way to the seventh valve opened. So, if you were assuming that O was always opened before G, that would cause you problems through the game.

Please take a look at that and let me know if that helps make this game easier! In the meantime, I posted a complete explanation to Question #3 just in case the above does not resolve the issue.

Thanks!

[mmhubbar]

Hi Dave,

Would you recommend tacking on all of the "not" laws underneath each slot? Would that waste too much time? The first time, I tried to include all of the not laws under each slot and it felt both time consuming and a little confusing to see so many letters underneath the diagram. On the other hand, I felt that if I didn't include them, I would trip up really easily if one of the question included a variable where there was a not-law, and I didn't notice because I didn't diagram it.

[Dave Killoran]

Hi M,

Thanks for the question!

NO, in sequencing games in particular, this is not the strategy to use. Instead, look to the end points and understand who could be first or last, survey the range of motion of each variable, watch for any trouble points, and then move on. showing all the Nots on a full sequence like this is a time-killer, and to be avoided. At most, I'd do the first or last slot, and then call it.

Thanks!

[mmhubbar]

Thank you so much for your help Dave!