aileenann
Thanks Received: 227
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 300
Joined: March 10th, 2009
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Diagram

by aileenann Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:16 pm

Diagram and solution to problem # 4 attached.
Attachments
PT56, S1, G1 - Saxaphonist Auditions - ManhattanLSAT.pdf
(56.78 KiB) Downloaded 1773 times
 
dan
Thanks Received: 155
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 202
Joined: March 10th, 2009
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Re: PT 56 S 1 G1 Individual hour-long auditions

by dan Mon May 10, 2010 1:48 pm

Attached is a full solution (setup and questions) that our San Francisco instructor, Kim, wrote up. It's a different approach that uses frames.

dan
Attachments
PT56, S1, G1 - diagram Saxaphone - ManhattanLSAT.pdf
(270.7 KiB) Downloaded 1207 times
 
chike_eze
Thanks Received: 94
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 279
Joined: January 22nd, 2011
 
 
trophy
Most Thanked
 

Re: Diagram

by chike_eze Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:13 am

How long should it take to diagram this Q with frames? I missed the L--K inference when I did this during my timed PT. I was able to answer all questions during review but framing took some time.

Thanks!
 
andrewgong01
Thanks Received: 61
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 289
Joined: October 31st, 2016
 
 
 

Re: Diagram

by andrewgong01 Wed Mar 22, 2017 4:35 pm

On the work out diagram solutions in the student portal it says that in this game J and L are interchangeable and hence can't be linked. Does this mean in general that when we have rules where we don't know the precise ordering of two variables (if it's after or before) we should not attempt to make like a "relative ordering diagram "of trying to combine the rules together ? In other words, we should not be combining rules until we get to the question?
User avatar
 
ohthatpatrick
Thanks Received: 3808
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 4661
Joined: April 01st, 2011
 
 
 

Re: Diagram

by ohthatpatrick Thu Mar 23, 2017 8:30 pm

Yeah, that's a fair generalization (that may have some narrow exceptions here and there).

If you have reversible chunks, it's usually dangerous to
- link other rules to them
- try to base frames around them

That said, this game is one in which I might make an exception, since G, L, and J all show up in 2 rules.
 
AyakiK696
Thanks Received: 2
Elle Woods
Elle Woods
 
Posts: 56
Joined: July 05th, 2017
 
 
 

Re: Diagram

by AyakiK696 Sun Jul 23, 2017 2:32 pm

I approached questions 5 and 6 using trial-and-error and found that to be quite time consuming, but it seemed as though the frames might take some time to set up as well, and so how should we decide when to frame in a case like this, when it's not just one either/or?
User avatar
 
ohthatpatrick
Thanks Received: 3808
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 4661
Joined: April 01st, 2011
 
This post thanked 1 time.
 
 

Re: Diagram

by ohthatpatrick Mon Jul 24, 2017 2:29 pm

There's not a correct answer, so just go for one of them and then live to regret it / be grateful for it later.

I am very frame-loving. I will routinely frame a chunk with four options. But I would counsel AGAINST framing on this game (and I only know that because I tried to frame it). :)

Part of being good at framing is understanding that most frames don't pan out and trigger anything. So I quickly survey for the ones where stuff starts clicking, and any of them that don't have an initial triggered response I quickly leave as is.

This game's frames become a bit of a quicksand pit, since you can ALMOST figure stuff out, but you would need to sub-frame some of these reversible chunks in order for something to be triggered.

The lesson I learned from this game (and another similar ordering game with two reversible chunks) is that framing with reversible chunks can be dicey. If it starts feeling too iffy, just get moving onto the questions.

Or ... fully commit and do the 8 frames you'd need:
J _ L in each of its four options
and
L _ J in each of its four options

Many of those would flesh out. At least one would blow up. But 8 frames is pretty crazy for 99% of test takers.