Diagram

[unclefester2013]

OK, what should have been a simple relative ordering game, but rules 2 and 3 threw me off my game. If I'm correct, I believe even the contrapositive came into play. With that, other than 3 separate sets of rules, I wasn't able to come up with a main diagram. I seems like a couple of frames should crack this baby wide open, but I just can't see them. So instead of breezing through this one, I ended up having to muscle through questions, taking WAY too much time.

Could someone show me a complete set up please?

Thank you.

[noah]

This is a hairy game. At first, most people are probably excited to have a relative ordering game since they are generally relatively easy (no pun intended). Then there's a strange either-or division in the rules, which more experienced students will see as a great opportunity to build frames, but then each of those frames needs another set of frames and it becomes a mess. Try a couple of frames without flushing either one out to full completion.

[Carlystern]

This is a hairy game. At first, most people are probably excited to have a relative ordering game since they are generally relatively easy (no pun intended). Then there's a strange either-or division in the rules, which more experienced students will see as a great opportunity to build frames, but then each of those frames needs another set of frames and it becomes a mess. Try a couple of frames without flushing either one out to full completion.

Noah,

I am really confused by how you set up the 2 & 3 rules.

I interpreted the rules to be much different. I'm not questioning your interpretation, but the fact that I am so wrong is pretty frustrating.

To me, the rule looks like this:

G-J or L-G

But, you have it placed much differently. The same goes for the 3rd rule, too.

Can you help me understand the wording?

Carly

Update:

BUT NOT BOTH, so in order for G to be before J, but not after L, then L would also have to come before G. DUH

Does anyone else have trouble with this? This was WEIRD.

Carly

[ohthatpatrick]

You are not alone. These are some nasty rules that have come into favor over the past 20 tests.

You routinely see these now as part of Relative Ordering and Basic Ordering games. (I think LSAC realized that we were all getting too good at the "classic" Relative/Basic Ordering, so they needed a way to make them more challenging again).

This "type" of rule is typified by the but not both, so it's good you had an epiphany based on that language ... that's what you need to remember going forward.

For these "but not both" rules, you will always get two different way all three elements could be arranged.

For example:
B is before F or before G, but not both.

This would give us
F - B - G
or
G - B - F

Another way to think of these is "you can't be BEFORE both of them or AFTER both of them" is to think, "B always has to be IN BETWEEN them".

You could potentially symbolize this rule more succinctly as
F/G - B - G/F

When the rule gives a mix of before and after, such as
"K is before P or after O, but not both", you'll end up saying "K is either BEFORE both of them or AFTER both of them"

K -- P and O
or
P and O -- K

(note: I would normally write those rules the way Noah wrote his; it's just impossible to make it look like that in this typing environment)

Let us know if you have any questions about these.

[aim4success]

I don't understand the inference to the right of the first frame which states "V either goes before P or after G". Please elaborate.

[ohthatpatrick]

Basically we have two either/or rules
G is before or after J,L
and
V is before or after G,P

That would create 4 frames:
G before, V before
G before, V after
G after, V before
G after, V after

Too much! What we've done on the diagram is just framed
G before J,L and G after J,L

In each of those frames, we're considering what the implications are of
V is before or after G,P

In the top frame, G is before P. (G -- P)

So if V is before G,P, then it's V - G - P
If V is after G, P then it's G - P - V

The diagram is summing that up as "V is before G or after P"

For the second frame,
V is before or after G,P
doesn't have any shorthand way of summing it up, since G and P have no connection in that frame.

So the diagram is simply reiterating the V rule saying, "before both of them or after both of them"

[jacob.k.q]

So, I managed to get 5/6 correct on this one (ran out of time on the final question) with just the two frames from the second rule. The third rule I merely drew out on the side in case I needed it.

There was not enough time to flesh out all the possible frames, so I went with what I mentioned above. Is this an "ok" strategy in case I run into a similarly complex game on the test?

[ohthatpatrick]

Yeah, I think you did what we're all saying to do:

DON'T frame both rules (four frames). Just frame one of the rules (two frames) and then manage that last rule on the side.

[KateB577]

Basically we have two either/or rules
G is before or after J,L
and
V is before or after G,P

That would create 4 frames:
G before, V before
G before, V after
G after, V before
G after, V after

Too much! What we've done on the diagram is just framed
G before J,L and G after J,L

In each of those frames, we're considering what the implications are of
V is before or after G,P

In the top frame, G is before P. (G -- P)

So if V is before G,P, then it's V - G - P
If V is after G, P then it's G - P - V

The diagram is summing that up as "V is before G or after P"

For the second frame,
V is before or after G,P
doesn't have any shorthand way of summing it up, since G and P have no connection in that frame.

So the diagram is simply reiterating the V rule saying, "before both of them or after both of them"

I am a little confused - in the first frame on the right hand side, isn't P before G (if we are reading from left to right)? I am also a little lost as to why we are writing "V is either before P or after G" in frame one, but in frame 2 we write, "V is either before both P and G or after both" -- I get why we are writing this rule off to the side so as not to have to juggle more frames. What I don't understand is why, for Frame 1, we do not write, "V is either before both P and G or after both," as we do in Frame 2. Thank you for your help!

[ohthatpatrick]

Yes, in frame 1 it's true that P is before G. Why were you asking about that? Were you hearing someone say that P isn't before G in frame 1?

======

Regarding these side-blurbs:
It would have been totally fine on that diagram for them to have erased both of those blurbs and simply put next to our two frames, "V is before P and G or after them".

All they're doing by adding two distinct blurbs is adding a little bit of extra specificity about what we know in frame 1.

Since we already know P - G in frame 1,
if V is before P and G, then it will go V - P - G, which they are summarizing by saying "V is before P"
if V is after P and G, then it will go P - G - V, which they are summarizing by saying "V is after G"

On its own, if we had a rule like "V is before P and G", we would write it like
.....P
.../
.V
...\
.....G

But if we already know that P - G, then writing
V - P - G
successfully combines "Vis before P and G" and "P is before G".

Does that make sense?
In other words, if you were trying to add "V is before P and G" to frame 1, you wouldn't need to draw a V - P line AND draw a V - G line.
Since P is before G, if we do V - P then we're guaranteeing that V will be before G as well.

[AndrewB184]

I've read the previous explanations and still don't understand how to diagram this without some messy frames. Is there a succinct way to show all the rules in one diagram?

[DevorahK415]

I am 100% lost.

Can we start with where this is in the curriculum?

Also, I'm not following why the "V" rule is left on its own.

Thanks.

[Laura Damone]

Hi!

First, I'm so sorry about the embarrassingly late reply on this and your other posts from 5.2. These slipped through the proverbial cracks and I didn't see them among the list of unanswered posts.

Framing in Relative ordering games is covered in Ch 4 of the LG Strategy Guide, starting on page 160.

That section will explain how to frame when there is an either/or rule like we see in this game. One of the wild things about this game is that there are actually 2 either/or rules. The set-up that Noah posted accounts for this by putting the V rule written out beside each of the frames generated by the JGL rule. In each of those frames, V must either go before both both P and G or after both P and G. Another way of dealing with this rule would be to create 4 frames instead of 2. So, instead of writing a note beside each of the JGL frames, you could actually redraw each one, then build V before P and G in one and after P and G in the other.

Hope this helps!

[AnnaT620]

Hi Team

I've read through the above, but unfortunately not sure I've followed the process for diagramming either/or and not both - am still quite lost. My understanding was to diagram this rule as (which seems to be completely wrong):

J - G - L
G - L - J

I am not sure where I am going wrong here. Or how you get to either J & L > G or G > L & J ?

In this question, once you do get there - why did you decide to Frame based on the second rule, instead of the third?

What is the general process for diagramming either/or and not both combined - will it always look like the above?

Thanks so much, and apologies for the many questions!

Anna