I'm starting to lose it because of LG

User avatar
BallHog
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 4:20 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby BallHog » Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:17 am

hblake wrote:Here's what I came up with.

--ImageRemoved--

The thing is, it didn't help me answer the questions. For example:

Question 4: If L and M are in group 2, then a person who could be assigned either to group 1 or, alternatively, to group 2 is

A) F
B) G
C) H
D) J
E) K

The reason I am posting this example is because, although my diagram seemed sufficient, I could not visualize the connections. This example is, to me, the epitome of the type that I find too abstract, for some reason, to actually answer at all, even with unlimited time, almost (I did answer it, eventually). The next Logic Game in the PT was relatively easy, which seemed really weird, seeing as this series of questions was just so impossible-seeming.

How do you VISUALIZE these letter-combinations?

Logic chain made this cake.

Image

M.M.
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby M.M. » Tue Jul 31, 2012 2:43 am

hblake wrote:How would you diagram this LG?

--ImageRemoved--



--ImageRemoved--

It should be noted though that I accidentally saw the poster below yours' diagram / placeholder.


Also, I forgot to note that K is a floater.
Last edited by M.M. on Tue Jul 31, 2012 2:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

M.M.
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby M.M. » Tue Jul 31, 2012 2:44 am

bp shinners wrote:
M.M. wrote:I have him next to the line for #23 in my diagram as being able to be in lap 3.


Are you drawing out all the places where someone can go in your diagrams? That seems like a huge time expenditure that is unnecessary. What's important in LGs is where people can't go, because you should think of games as anything being possible until a rule tells you it isn't. Restrictions are the name of the game, not allowances.



Nope, I'm not

M.M.
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby M.M. » Tue Jul 31, 2012 2:55 am

hblake wrote:Here's what I came up with.

--ImageRemoved--

The thing is, it didn't help me answer the questions. For example:

Question 4: If L and M are in group 2, then a person who could be assigned either to group 1 or, alternatively, to group 2 is

A) F
B) G
C) H
D) J
E) K

The reason I am posting this example is because, although my diagram seemed sufficient, I could not visualize the connections. This example is, to me, the epitome of the type that I find too abstract, for some reason, to actually answer at all, even with unlimited time, almost (I did answer it, eventually). The next Logic Game in the PT was relatively easy, which seemed really weird, seeing as this series of questions was just so impossible-seeming.

How do you VISUALIZE these letter-combinations?


The best way I can think of attacking these is to just make hypotheticals for each answer choice ... put F in 1, then F in 2 ... as you put F in 2 you see J must be there as well (making it full), since M is in 2 G must be in 1, but then you notice that H must go in 1, which would drag L into 1 ...

Doing it this way could possibly force me to write 10 hypotheticals and I'm not very fast at it (obviously) ... so yeah I'd struggle here too. But to be fair, I haven't gone over the LGB section on in / out games, so there might be some strategies there ... Too often I just find myself writing hypotheticals to be honest.





As an "update" I guess, I did some basic linear games last night and did pretty well, did some at 4 PM today and did pretty well ... then got home from the gym and did pretty poorly on 3 in a row. It isn't bugging me too much because 1 of them I just missed writing a rule (again with the stupid mistakes), 1 was unlike any I had seen before so it took me a minute to figure out, and I don't really remember the other ... but it was also weird. Going to print out some basic linear balanced from a pdf I have from PT 3-35 and give that a go, then come back to the ones I screwed up on (so that my memory of them isn't as much of a factor when re-doing them) and give it a go.

M.M.
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2010 5:16 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby M.M. » Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:03 am

BallHog wrote:
hblake wrote:Here's what I came up with.

--ImageRemoved--

The thing is, it didn't help me answer the questions. For example:

Question 4: If L and M are in group 2, then a person who could be assigned either to group 1 or, alternatively, to group 2 is

A) F
B) G
C) H
D) J
E) K

The reason I am posting this example is because, although my diagram seemed sufficient, I could not visualize the connections. This example is, to me, the epitome of the type that I find too abstract, for some reason, to actually answer at all, even with unlimited time, almost (I did answer it, eventually). The next Logic Game in the PT was relatively easy, which seemed really weird, seeing as this series of questions was just so impossible-seeming.

How do you VISUALIZE these letter-combinations?

Logic chain made this cake.

Image


What you did there .... I do not see it. :|

User avatar
BallHog
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 4:20 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby BallHog » Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:33 am

M.M. wrote:
BallHog wrote:
hblake wrote:Here's what I came up with.

--ImageRemoved--

The thing is, it didn't help me answer the questions. For example:

Question 4: If L and M are in group 2, then a person who could be assigned either to group 1 or, alternatively, to group 2 is

A) F
B) G
C) H
D) J
E) K

The reason I am posting this example is because, although my diagram seemed sufficient, I could not visualize the connections. This example is, to me, the epitome of the type that I find too abstract, for some reason, to actually answer at all, even with unlimited time, almost (I did answer it, eventually). The next Logic Game in the PT was relatively easy, which seemed really weird, seeing as this series of questions was just so impossible-seeming.

How do you VISUALIZE these letter-combinations?

Logic chain made this cake.

Image


What you did there .... I do not see it. :|


It's Manhattan's method. The left part of the picture is my diagram. I made this diagram by making two groups, 1 and 2, then putting all the variables in both groups making sure the two columns are symmetrical (F is opposite F, G is opposite G, etc.). The first rule states:

F must be in the same group as J

To represent this rule, I drew a double arrow on both sides, which essentially means F and G are always in the same group as each other. For conditional statements, draw an arrow. For example:

if N is in group 2, G is in group 1

Represent this with an arrow going FROM N in group 2, to G in group 1. Also draw the contrapositive of this rule (If G is in 2, N is in 1).

Notice that there is a double arrow in there. That is for the rule, "G must be in a different group from M," which basically means they are never in the same group. So that rule means:

if G 1, M 2
if M 1, G 2
if M2, G1
if G2, M1

If you try and draw that, you will notice arrows will overlap. To simplify the representation, draw a double arrow.

Once your diagram is complete, move onto the questions. For the question provided, we are trying to find what happens when L and M are in group 2. Make a "T" table, and label one column 1 and the other 2 (to represent the different groups). Put L and M in group 2. On your diagram, start with M. ONLY GO IN THE DIRECTION OF THE ARROW, meaning if the arrow head is going TOWARDS M, DO NOT FOLLOW THAT PATH. So, start on M and it will take you to G, which is under "1," meaning that G is in group 1. Thats where your inferences stop for this one. Go to L. Repeat the process. You will get a table like the one I have drawn except for the N and the K. Since N and K didn't show up in the process, they are "floaters" meaning they can go in either group. N is not an answer choice, so the answer is (E).

Edit: When you are done putting L and its inferences in your table, you will notice group 2 has 3 letters. Since F and J must be in the same group and a group can have at most 4 letters, they obviously go in group 1.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby flem » Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:26 am

I find those logic chains completely confusing and worthless

User avatar
NoodleyOne
Posts: 2358
Joined: Fri May 25, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby NoodleyOne » Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:52 am

flem wrote:I find those logic chains completely confusing and worthless


Different strokes for different folks. I've never tried logic chains, but if it gets you off, you do whatever it takes.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby flem » Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:54 am

Alright, here's my diagram boxed at the bottom:
Image

You're right, this game does suck (at least it's more time consuming) than originally thought. So I'll run you through step by step.

Question 1)

A) Doesn't work because H is in 1 without L, violating the third rule
B) Doesn't work because F is there without J, violating the first rule
C) Doesn't work because neither M or G is there, which means they both have to be in group 2, violating the second rule
D) Is the correct answer
E) Doesn't work because M and G are both there, violating the second rule

Question 2)

What do you know? You now know that the [KN] block will be in one group and [FJ] block will be in the other. This also means that H must be in group 2 (since if H is in 1, L is in 1 and there's no room because of the M/G block) AND L must be in group 1 (for the same reason)

A) G could be in 1 or 2 and therefore doesn't HAVE to be true
B) Is the correct answer - H has to be in group 2 for the reason stated above
C) The FJ block and the KN block can be in either group and therefore doesn't HAVE to be true
D) Same reason as previous
E) M could be in 1 or 2 and therefore doesn't HAVE to be true

Question 3) I think this is the hardest question in the game

What do you know? You now have a big block of [FHJ], plus the G/M split block. This means that [KLN] is in the other group. Since variable K is a random, I would keep an eye out for anything it affects. I solved this one with hypotheticals that you can see in the diagram.

A) G can be in either group
B) J must be in group 1, not 2
C) Is the correct answer - the [KLN] block has to go in group 1 because L and H must be separated (because H in 1 would bring L in 1, making you place both M and G in the same group, violating the first rule)
D) L must be in group 1, not 2
E) M can be in either group

Question 4)

What do you know? Once again, the resulting [LM] block placed in 2 means that [FJ] will be in the other group 1. Since M is placed in 2 according to the stimulus, we know that G must be in one according to the second rule. This leaves K and N to be placed. Since K is a random and N can be placed in either group, represent this as a split block like so:

Group 1: G F J K/N

Group 2: M L H N/K

In any of these "could be true/could be placed in either group" questions, look for any answer containing one of the split block variables in the fourth slot - in the case, N or K

A) F has to be in group 1
B) G has to be in group 1
C) H has to be in group 2
D) J has to be in group 1
E) Is the correct answer

Question 5:

Start drawing hypotheticals if nothing is immediately apparent to you.

A) If F and G are in 1, that means J is also in 1. This places M into 2. K can go in either place, and L and H can go in either group as long as you follow rule 3.
B) Is the correct answer. If F and H are both in 1, so is J. Also, according to rule 3, if H is in 1, so is L. This means that M and G would have to go in group 2, violating the second rule.
C) F and L brings J. This means G has to go in 1 (because if G is in 2, N must go in 1, leaving no room for M and pushing M and G together), leaving the second group to be MKHN, which is fine.
D) H and G in 1 brings L, this means that [FJ] is in group 2, as well as M. N and K can go in either group without violating constrains, meaning this one is fine.
E) H and N brings L, this means the [FJ] block is in group 2. K is also in group 2 to leave space, and M and G can go in either group, meaning this one is also fine.

Question 6:

Start drawing hypoethicals if nothing is immediately apparent to you. What do we know? We know that if L is in 2, so is H according to the contrapositive of rule 3. This means the [FJ] block has to go in group 1. Once again, expect the random unrestricted variable of K to govern something, so look out for any answer that includes K as a likely contender.

A) If F and M go in 1, G goes in 2. If G is in 2, then N is in 1 in accordance with rule 4. This leaves you with 1: MFJN and 2: GLHK - this is fine.
B) If G and N are in 1, M and K have to go in 2 to leave room for the [FJ] block. This leaves you with 1: GNFJ and 2: MKLH - this is fine
C) If J and N are in 1, we have a scenario where we have 1: M/GFJN and 2: G/MLHK. Looks fine to me.
D) Is the correct answer. If K and M are in 1 and we already know from the above deduction that the [FJ] block is also in 1, this would push G and M together, violating rule 2.
E) If M and N are in 1, this gives us a group of 1: MFJN and 2: GLHK. Once again, perfectly fine.

A couple observations:

1) immediately note the binary nature of games like this. It will help with your deductions.
2) this game is SUPER heavy on your understanding of necessary and sufficient conditions. They try and trip you up frequently expecting you to fall for the trap of a mistaken reversal with the rules 3 and 4.

Hope this helps bros. Mods, feel free to edit this or PM me if too specific and I'll delete it.

User avatar
BallHog
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 4:20 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby BallHog » Tue Jul 31, 2012 10:21 am

NoodleyOne wrote:
flem wrote:I find those logic chains completely confusing and worthless


Different strokes for different folks. I've never tried logic chains, but if it gets you off, you do whatever it takes.


Yep :D... even with your creepy choice of words. :?

hblake
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:31 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby hblake » Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:08 am

.
Last edited by hblake on Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

hblake
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:31 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby hblake » Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:13 am

BallHog wrote:Logic chain made this cake.

Image


Please show me how you did question 5 with this diagram.

hblake
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:31 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby hblake » Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:22 am

M.M. wrote:--ImageRemoved--

It should be noted though that I accidentally saw the poster below yours' diagram / placeholder.


It should be noted that this thread is a result of your being burned out on LGs.

Also, I forgot to note that K is a floater.


Also, you forgot, even after editing your post, to fix the link to your diagram. Relax.

User avatar
cahwc12
Posts: 941
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby cahwc12 » Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:45 am

hblake wrote:Here's what I came up with.

--ImageRemoved--

The thing is, it didn't help me answer the questions. For example:

Question 4: edited copyright

The reason I am posting this example is because, although my diagram seemed sufficient, I could not visualize the connections. This example is, to me, the epitome of the type that I find too abstract, for some reason, to actually answer at all, even with unlimited time, almost (I did answer it, eventually). The next Logic Game in the PT was relatively easy, which seemed really weird, seeing as this series of questions was just so impossible-seeming.

How do you VISUALIZE these letter-combinations?



It's difficult to visualize the letter combinations you diagram when you butcher the representation so much. Sure, there are a bunch of ways you could represent the information, but the main reason you're probably having difficulty with this is because you're not even consistent with your diagramming.

Two groups = in/out game. You can draw it any way you like, but this particular way is just no good. Boxes labeled 1 and 2? Come on, I Know you can count to two. And you don't need four lines for a group when one will do. Any local question (one that starts with IF) will generally require you to start a new diagram to solve the question. Do you really want to produce two boxes and a 1, 2? Can you think of a more efficient way to express the same concept? Two groups of different things? What's the fastest way to redraw that? Think "T" and you'll soon get a light bulb.

F&J. Are you using an ampersand anywhere in the game other than your notation? There's nothing inherently wrong with this except that there's no reusability with it. The reason most people prefer to box or circle them to indicate cohesion is because you can similarly use a box or circle with a slash to indicate separation. (In those cases, a square indicates order, whereas an oval would just indicate cohesion.)

G - M. What does this even mean? You have horizontal groups and a horizontal rule now. Again, you have made up some new method to diagram, and when you look at it, you have to learn it only for this kind of rule, with no reusability. But worse, your rule, indicating that they can't be horizontally aligned, is horizontally aligned! If your goal is to create a good visual representation, this would seem to be not the best way to represent this rule! If you're trying to show separation, make it vertical. Or better still, a rule this specific should be incorporated into the main diagram!

H1, L1 and N2, G1. Diagram this for me: If I eat my dinner then I will get dessert. Did you diagram it as "dinner, dessert"? No, you diagrammed it as "dinner --> dessert." So why change things for this game? If it works for you, great. But be consistent with your diagramming methodology.


So here we are, not even into the questions, and everything in your setup is not WRONG but it is not consistent with the way you (should have) been taught to view reasoning problems like this. You do have a setup and four rules, but the rules as you have set them up don't even mesh with each other, so how will you be able to see the matrix code when you get to the questions?

Image

Again, this may or may not be the best possible way to do a game, but look how visually consistent it is. It uses the same rules and techniques and is more intuitive. An oval here indicates cohesion, although not order. G and M could be reversed, but they both must occupy those spots. F and J could be J and F, but they both must occupy those spots in the same group. Notice how they are vertically aligned like the groups are now vertically aligned, whereas G and M are horizontally aligned.

Then you have the conditional rules. A ---> B, and there's no reason to significantly deviate from that. Now, revisiting an earlier point: if you do actually diagram your conditional statements with a comma, perhaps you could ignore this. But you would be the only person I've seen that does that.



I highly recommend both you and M.M to look in your areas (or online) for a personal tutor for games. Spend an hour or two with someone who consistently crushes games and you'll begin to see the matrix code. If that's really all that's holding you back, think of it as an opportunity cost of personal tutor vs. law school tuition. A 164 might get you into the school you want to go to, but an extra 7 or 8 question bump will get you certainly get you there, and probably with a nice scholarship.


edit: I didn't answer your question (4), but I drew it out and it took maybe 18 seconds for me to draw and answer (which isn't that fast). Here it is solved only by conditional reasoning from the initial rules:

[ML]2 --> G1 and H2 --> [FJ]1

This leaves N and K unrestricted for the last spot in either group. This is an easy question, and once you get the hang of it, the answers just fall out. It takes practice and consistency, but almost anyone can get to that point.

hblake
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:31 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby hblake » Tue Jul 31, 2012 12:45 pm

.
Last edited by hblake on Sun Sep 02, 2012 10:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BallHog
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 4:20 am

Re: I'm starting to lose it because of LG

Postby BallHog » Tue Jul 31, 2012 5:47 pm

hblake wrote:
BallHog wrote:Logic chain made this cake.

Image


Please show me how you did question 5 with this diagram.


you'd have to make a T table for every answer choice. Not as troublesome as it seems.. making one T table takes me around 10 seconds.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, Baidu [Spider], beancounter15, Majestic-12 [Bot], mukol, Pozzo, theGrinch, VMars and 15 guests