Hypos over main diagram instead of new diagram? Forum

[niederbomb]

I'm wondering if, when space allows, like on PT 49 S1 Game 2, if it's better to do the work for each question on a new diagram written above the main diagram with the inferences. That seems like it could save some time because it would save writing out the hypos and variables again. On the other hand, it's sometimes hard to line things up properly. Should I practice doing this, or is it a bad idea?

Like this:

JJRGR =Q. #12 YES!
? J/RJ?J =Q# 12 NOPE!
JRJ?J =Q. #10 (CANNOT)
GJJGR =Q. #8
FLMPS

EDIT: I guess lining stuff up is even worse on the computer.

[cortnf]

I always used one main diagram with global inferences, and then local diagrams with local inferences if needed (if A goes fourth, then B must go...)

never add or erase anything from your main diagram for a local question

[sophia.olive]

I used one diagram, mostly. I wrote lighter when it was a local rule and darker for an initial rule. I then erased the local rule each time.

[cortnf]

I used one diagram, mostly. I wrote lighter when it was a local rule and darker for an initial rule. I then erased the local rule each time.

my issue with this is that, by erasing your local rules, you erase information that could be helpful on a later question.

for example, if you come up with a hypo for a certain local question that reveals a linear order of ACEBD, and a later question asks "which of the following cannot be true?", where "C goes second" is an option, you know that this answer choice is wrong, because you've found it in an earlier hypo. if you erase this information, you'll most likely forget that you've discovered this little piece of info, and will therefore waste time proving it wrong for a second time.

moral of the story: make a new, local diagram for each local question, lest you erase something important

[niederbomb]

sophia.olive wrote:
I used one diagram, mostly. I wrote lighter when it was a local rule and darker for an initial rule. I then erased the local rule each time.


my issue with this is that, by erasing your local rules, you erase information that could be helpful on a later question.

I think y'all misunderstood.

I'm not asking if it's a good idea to erase; rather, I'm asking if it's a good idea to stack local diagrams above the main diagram while not actually changing the main diagram. The drawback is it's hard to line things up.

The alternative is doing local diagrams next to the questions, which requires a lot more writing.

[kpuc]

You can usually whip up new diagrams pretty quickly. And you should never erase valid hypos because they will inevitably be useful.

The only time you might want to refrain from new diagrams is when there are a lot of "not rules". Making new diagrams would either require you to re-write the "not rules" thereby taking up a lot of time, or you might lose track of those rules if you choose not to write them down.

In this case, you could use the main diagram and keep erasing to make space, but make sure to record valid hypos somewhere else in the corner.

[AverageTutoring]

sophia.olive wrote:
I used one diagram, mostly. I wrote lighter when it was a local rule and darker for an initial rule. I then erased the local rule each time.


my issue with this is that, by erasing your local rules, you erase information that could be helpful on a later question.

I think y'all misunderstood.

I'm not asking if it's a good idea to erase; rather, I'm asking if it's a good idea to stack local diagrams above the main diagram while not actually changing the main diagram. The drawback is it's hard to line things up.

The alternative is doing local diagrams next to the questions, which requires a lot more writing.

I take it you are using PowerScores method of creating one main diagram at the bottom of the page while drawing additional diagrams beside each local question? I used to do this, but what I found was that when making my additional diagrams beside each question I would waste massive amounts of time, espesially if the diagram required 2 or 3 tiers. Also, I found that because I wasted so much time drawing these diagrams I would rush through them and leave off very important not laws, leading to incorrect hypos and ultimately, to wrong answers!

I then moved to the chart style, shown bellow:



I would include everything in that diagram: not laws, local questions, global questions, etc. For the local questions, I would write the additional rule beside the line I was working with. For example, if I was on question 3 and I was on the third line of my chart, the local rule for that question would be drawn beside the third line so that I knew it as specific to that line only.

What I found was that this approach eliminated my problem of missing not laws when doing local questions. It also makes it much faster for answering global questions because you have all your local questions + hypos in one place.

So my vote is for this!

[cortnf]

sophia.olive wrote:
I used one diagram, mostly. I wrote lighter when it was a local rule and darker for an initial rule. I then erased the local rule each time.


my issue with this is that, by erasing your local rules, you erase information that could be helpful on a later question.

I think y'all misunderstood.

I'm not asking if it's a good idea to erase; rather, I'm asking if it's a good idea to stack local diagrams above the main diagram while not actually changing the main diagram. The drawback is it's hard to line things up.

The alternative is doing local diagrams next to the questions, which requires a lot more writing.

I take it you are using PowerScores method of creating one main diagram at the bottom of the page while drawing additional diagrams beside each local question? I used to do this, but what I found was that when making my additional diagrams beside each question I would waste massive amounts of time, espesially if the diagram required 2 or 3 tiers. Also, I found that because I wasted so much time drawing these diagrams I would rush through them and leave off very important not laws, leading to incorrect hypos and ultimately, to wrong answers!

I then moved to the chart style, shown bellow:



I would include everything in that diagram: not laws, local questions, global questions, etc. For the local questions, I would write the additional rule beside the line I was working with. For example, if I was on question 3 and I was on the third line of my chart, the local rule for that question would be drawn beside the third line so that I knew it as specific to that line only.

What I found was that this approach eliminated my problem of missing not laws when doing local questions. It also makes it much faster for answering global questions because you have all your local questions + hypos in one place.

So my vote is for this!

That actually seems pretty cool. No matter which way you choose to represent, in the end, TCR is not erasing valid hypos.

[niederbomb]

AverageTutoring,

I think drawing a grid would not work for me, personally, since I'm horrible at drawing straight lines.

Do you think this type of diagram would accomplish the same result?


EDIT: Apparently, you need to have your own website with a url to post images on here. WTF? Anyway, I made a diagram of PT 49 Game 2 to ask about, but I can't put it on here. How did you include your table on here?

Alright, stuck it in my avatar. Do you think it accomplishes what your grid diagram does?

[AverageTutoring]

AverageTutoring,

I think drawing a grid would not work for me, personally, since I'm horrible at drawing straight lines.

Do you think this type of diagram would accomplish the same result?


EDIT: Apparently, you need to have your own website with a url to post images on here. WTF? Anyway, I made a diagram of PT 49 Game 2 to ask about, but I can't put it on here. How did you include your table on here?

Alright, stuck it in my avatar. Do you think it accomplishes what your grid diagram does?

You can upload it to image shack and put the link in image tags, works like a charm!

Well if you look at it, my chart is simply a closed off version of your diagram. There really is nothing fundamentally different other then that mine is closed off. The main principle here is that we're keeping everything in one central place so we dont have to reconstruct our diagram 10 times, yeah PowerScore, I'm looking at you! So it definitely conveys the same material. Though, without closed borders it might get messy when you have games that require 2 or 3 tiers.

But try it out and see if it works! I know the day after going from PowerScore's method to putting everything in one central diagram, the games went from -3/-4 to -0/-1 instantly.

[kehoema2]

Why wouldn't you just leave the locals by their respective question? With that, they are easy to find, you know the exact local condition and you do not clutter your main diagram. In my opinion, cluttering your global diagram is a terrible idea, even if only by stacking.

[Manhattan LSAT Noah]

I think this falls deep into the "whatever works for you" category. For me, if the diagram is simple, like for an ordering game or a simple assignment one, then I can put the diagram anywhere. If the diagram is involved, and I might "lose" rules as I build a hypo, I try to do my hypothetical near the original. But, a lot of times, the real issue is where I have space. And, for some games, i find it best to lightly circle things in the original diagram, but clearly you have to be careful. I think having all of this at your disposal (i.e. being comfortable with it) is ideal.

[tomwatts]

I like having the columns in a chart (even if I can't draw straight lines either) because it makes scanning previous work very, very easy. The example given above (noticing that C has been in space 2 in a previous question, so "C cannot be in 2" is false or whatever) is a significant part of the method for what I call "general" (evidently PS calls them "global") questions, and this sort of scanning is much easier when everything is lined up. The only objection I've ever heard is the "clutter" one voiced above, but it's not cluttered if you know exactly what the organizational system is. Your first line is always true. Your subsequent lines are true for specific questions. That's it. Having hypos all over the page seems much more cluttered to me.

[niederbomb]

AverageTutoring, thanks for that grid idea. Tried it out on PT 22, Game 2 and Game 3 and it worked well in cases where stacking wouldn't.

[AverageTutoring]

AverageTutoring, thanks for that grid idea. Tried it out on PT 22, Game 2 and Game 3 and it worked well in cases where stacking wouldn't.

To be perfectly honest the chart is pretty much the same thing as stacking. But instead of your base being at the bottom, it's at the top and instead of going up, you go down. The reason why I like the chart over stacking is because it makes multi-tiered games easier to represent. And all that has to do with is the closed offness of the chart (less muddled). But yeah...it's pretty much the same, so if you can do one, you can do the other.

Glad to see that it worked. Hope it continues to help!