Diagram

[staceyhursh]

I really could use help - my tree is all over the place. I created two different diagrams with the third rule, but for some reason this entire game really threw me. Thanks.

[gilad.bendheim]

Hi - I'll give it a try, but not sure how well it'll go. Hopefully it will help in some way!

Diagram (sorry about the dots, only way I could figure out how to post this...)

....N
-----\.
.......T
....../
.....J
.../
F
..\
....H

rule 3:

(a) P - H&N
OR
(b) H&N - P

Therefore [H/N - P - H/N] is impossible


For me, because of the uncertainty surrounding P, it was best not to write down any of the inferences onto the board, but you can quickly see from the diagram that only F, N, or P (if 3a) can be first and that only T, H, or P (if 3b) can be last.

These alone will get you (6) and (7) pretty quickly. (8) is easy enough when you look at the diagram and see that at least 3 artifacts must follow F. (9) and (10) are local questions, both of which rely on (A) the inference of P having to either be before or after N and H, but not in between and (B) the understanding of the limitations on F because it is followed by 3 artifacts. (11) is one of those new tricky ones, and I don't know the best way to do it other than to eliminate the obvious ones and try out the ones that seem good.

[staceyhursh]

Thanks for you response - I am making sense of it.

[monicaiannacone]

I diagramed this game in two parts: one with the tree for rules 1 and 2 and another tree for the option in rule 3. Is this the best way to diagram the game? I got 4/6 correct but didn't feel as comfortable as I normally do on these easy relative ordering games!

Can someone post the correct tree for this game? The answers depend on an accurate tree. I did attempt to combine the rules but it didn't seem to work right for me, which caused guessing and trial and error.

Thanks!

[timmydoeslsat]

I would not combine the trees in this game. I think the combined trees does not lead to anything useful. Either the P is after those 2 or before. Really it is a rule simply saying that P can't be between the two.

However, this is what it would look like combined:



To combine the 2 trees will require a savvy reading of the tree. You must be able to see that the "F" in the first combined tree does not have to come after the P, as there are no lines connecting F to a variable before it, thus it can go first. That is the most important thing to realize. If there are not lines before a variable, it could go first. Similarly, if there are no lines after a variable, it could go last.

[jasonshaffer0]

I would not combine the trees in this game. I think the combined trees does not lead to anything useful. Either the P is after those 2 or before. Really it is a rule simply saying that P can't be between the two.

However, this is what it would look like combined:



To combine the 2 trees will require a savvy reading of the tree. You must be able to see that the "F" in the first combined tree does not have to come after the P, as there are no lines connecting F to a variable before it, thus it can go first. That is the most important thing to realize. If there are not lines before a variable, it could go first. Similarly, if there are no lines after a variable, it could go last.

I would agree with not combining. I played this game the first time by combining, and missed the question about how many could be first, because I mis-read the diagram. One of the letters was "surrounded" by other lines, but was still open on the left side and could have easily been first. I just didn't see it. Since then I have taken the stance of usually not combining "or" statements in my tree diagram.