Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

User avatar
Easy-E
Posts: 5685
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:46 pm

Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Easy-E » Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:37 am

Here is a link to the problem...
http://www.manhattanlsat.com/logic-games-practice.cfm


I'm confused on a fundamental point here. The problem states that "each board must have the same total processing capacity as any other board". My immediate assumption was that this means that the sum of both numbers assigned to each board would be equal for all boards, therefore they would all equal 9 (1+8, 7+2, 6+3, 5+4), but this seems like a highly limiting condition. However, the first question concerns ordering them from smallest to largest, so clearly I'm assuming incorrectly. Can someone clear up this condition?

User avatar
pinkzeppelin
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby pinkzeppelin » Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:41 am

I think you have the constraint right but the question is worded strangely.

"Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the four smallest processors, from smallest to largest?"

Yes, all of the BOARDS have the same processing power, but not the processors. I believe it means to ask "Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the (Boards with the) four smallest processors from smallest to largest?"

I think that's the only way it makes sense.

User avatar
Easy-E
Posts: 5685
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:46 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Easy-E » Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:48 am

pinkzeppelin wrote:I think you have the constraint right but the question is worded strangely.

"Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the four smallest processors, from smallest to largest?"

Yes, all of the BOARDS have the same processing power, but not the processors. I believe it means to ask "Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the (Boards with the) four smallest processors from smallest to largest?"

I think that's the only way it makes sense.


Ohhhh, like 1, 2, 3, 4, not the totals?

Manhattan LSAT Noah
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Manhattan LSAT Noah » Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:45 am

pinkzeppelin wrote:I think you have the constraint right but the question is worded strangely.

"Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the four smallest processors, from smallest to largest?"

Yes, all of the BOARDS have the same processing power, but not the processors. I believe it means to ask "Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the (Boards with the) four smallest processors from smallest to largest?"

I think that's the only way it makes sense.

You guys bring up a good point. I'll have to think whether that could be worded better.

User avatar
Easy-E
Posts: 5685
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:46 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Easy-E » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:04 pm

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:
pinkzeppelin wrote:I think you have the constraint right but the question is worded strangely.

"Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the four smallest processors, from smallest to largest?"

Yes, all of the BOARDS have the same processing power, but not the processors. I believe it means to ask "Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the (Boards with the) four smallest processors from smallest to largest?"

I think that's the only way it makes sense.

You guys bring up a good point. I'll have to think whether that could be worded better.


Its clear now, but yeah, I found it to be a bit confusing differentiating between the two. I understood the part about the processing capacity being the total of the two numbers, it was just discerning that the term "processor" didn't refer to the unit as a whole (with both processors).

--
Edit: Now I'm just thinking I'm misunderstanding the entire game. I have little to no actual LG practice under my belt, just the very basics and what I already know.

"U must be assigned one processor that has more processing power than either of the processors assigned to T."

I'm confused over whether "either" is meant to be additive (is that the right word?), which would amouint to "U > (T+T'). But because all processors are equal, that would be impossible, since 8 is the highest, and the total of each is 9. Therefore, I assumed it only required U to be greater than ONE of T's two processors. So I eliminate choice E right off, since it violates an initial condition (T = ~6). The problem I have now is that both choioces A and B have 8 being on U, which is higher than any other number, obviously including whichever are assigned to T.


So I assume I must have messed up somewhere. Was my assumption that all the motherboards total capacity is 9? I don't see any other way to divide 1-8 evenly amongst them...Please help!

Manhattan LSAT Noah
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Manhattan LSAT Noah » Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:57 pm

Don't sweat it. The "either" means that the size has to be larger than each of them individually.

More importantly, if you're just starting out, I wouldn't suggest starting with our games. You should start by getting a strategy guide (I like ours, but lots of people also find the LGB to work for them), and then practice specific strategies on easier games. Then work up to advanced games of a specific type, and then do mixed review (full LSATs). We don't intend our games to replace the real LSAT ones, but we think they're good additions (additives :lol: ).

I hope that answers your questions.

User avatar
Easy-E
Posts: 5685
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:46 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Easy-E » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:10 pm

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:Don't sweat it. The "either" means that the size has to be larger than each of them individually.

More importantly, if you're just starting out, I wouldn't suggest starting with our games. You should start by getting a strategy guide (I like ours, but lots of people also find the LGB to work for them), and then practice specific strategies on easier games. Then work up to advanced games of a specific type, and then do mixed review (full LSATs). We don't intend our games to replace the real LSAT ones, but we think they're good additions (additives :lol: ).

I hope that answers your questions.



Hmm so then why aren't both A and B viable answers? U would be first, giving it 1+8, and T is last (4th) giving it 4+5, and with 8 being larger than 4 or 5 (this is the extent of my mathematical abilities :) ) they both seem correct.


Haha, yeah I was fairly sure that wasn't the right term. I've had some exposure to LG before (the NOVA book only), and I've taken on PT cold, so to say I'm an absolute beginner would be a lie. How would you rate this problem on a general scale of difficulty?

Cambridge LSAT
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:26 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Cambridge LSAT » Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:30 pm

(A) is unacceptable because it is missing R and it associates T with two processor pairs: 2 & 7 and 4 & 5.

Kurst
Posts: 448
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:33 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Kurst » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:37 pm

Some explanations for this game are in this thread:

http://www.manhattanlsat.com/forums/log ... t3972.html

User avatar
Easy-E
Posts: 5685
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:46 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Easy-E » Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:44 pm

Cambridge LSAT wrote:(A) is unacceptable because it is missing R and it associates T with two processor pairs: 2 & 7 and 4 & 5.


Wow, I cannot believe I didn't notice that.

Manhattan LSAT Noah
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Manhattan LSAT Noah » Fri Mar 18, 2011 7:38 pm

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:
pinkzeppelin wrote:I think you have the constraint right but the question is worded strangely.

"Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the four smallest processors, from smallest to largest?"

Yes, all of the BOARDS have the same processing power, but not the processors. I believe it means to ask "Which of the following is an acceptable assignment of the (Boards with the) four smallest processors from smallest to largest?"

I think that's the only way it makes sense.

You guys bring up a good point. I'll have to think whether that could be worded better.

New wording for #1 on the site. See what you think.

aquyenl
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:57 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby aquyenl » Fri Mar 18, 2011 8:38 pm

this game imo was really good. the initial wording of the questions were pretty tough to decipher however.

Kurst
Posts: 448
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 9:33 pm

Re: Manhattan LSAT Game of the Week...

Postby Kurst » Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:56 pm

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:New wording for #1 on the site. See what you think.

I'd rephrase the first question as follows: "1. Which one of the following is an acceptable partial list of processors and the motherboards to which they are assigned?"




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, addie1412 and 7 guests