Discussion
For how many of the six new employees is the
assignment of a parking space limited to one of only two
possible spaces?
*This question is included in Oct 2011 LSAT (PT 64): Logic Games, question #4
| (A) | none |
| (B) | ... |
| (C) | ... |
| (D) | ... |
| (E) | ... |
| (F) | ... |
The solution is
Posted: 05/25/2012 12:45
Would someone please explain how to work this question type? I keep firing off possible combinations and eventually wind up guessing in frustration.
Posted: 05/25/2012 16:19
For PTs 63-64-65, we sell the video explanations by LSAT Freedom. The explanations are done by graduates of Harvard Law School who scored in the 99th percentile. Please check it out in the Marketplace section of the app. They take you step-by-step through logic game questions and familiarize you with the different types of questions.
Posted: 05/25/2012 16:27
So, to be clear, only sample content included with the original app purchase comes with question-by-question support? The 35 dollar purchase of the tests does NOT include question-by-question support, as that must be purchased separately?
Posted: 05/25/2012 17:12
Bre, that is our plan but I guess we were not describing it well. $35 per app barely covers our cost for paying Apple 30% or $10.5, LSAC license, hosting fee (for this forum), developers who build and maintain the app. It is no more expensive than buying the book, and you can study anytime / anywhere with your iPhone / iPad. With some of the past packages (the ones start with "Lesson ...") we also include explanations, though not video explanations.
Starting with PTs 63-64-65, we offer video explanations by our LSAT professionals, so that we can make a bit more to cover our costs and continue to offer this service.
We also have other apps for GRE, GMAT, and SAT, and it is busier in those apps and easier to answer their questions. LSAT is a harder exam, so in our effort to provide good explanations, we partner with the pros at LSAT Freedom, but it costs money. At $49 per PT it is still very affordable though.
For this one question, we have included our best attempt at explaining.
Starting with PTs 63-64-65, we offer video explanations by our LSAT professionals, so that we can make a bit more to cover our costs and continue to offer this service.
We also have other apps for GRE, GMAT, and SAT, and it is busier in those apps and easier to answer their questions. LSAT is a harder exam, so in our effort to provide good explanations, we partner with the pros at LSAT Freedom, but it costs money. At $49 per PT it is still very affordable though.
For this one question, we have included our best attempt at explaining.
Posted: 05/25/2012 17:15
Thank you so much for clarifying--both the packages and the questions. I kept getting stuck after R, Y, and T were done. This app has been the most valuable prep tool I've used thus far. I appreciate the excellent customer support!
Posted: 05/25/2012 17:22
Always, for problems like this, draw the spaces:
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
1 2 3 4 5 6
Then write out the rules:
1) & 3) T < Y < R
2) S < X
4) R must be 1, 2, 3, 4
Now analyze.
Since R > Y > T, we must leave 2 spaces for T and Y. That means R can only be in 3 or 4. We have 1 employee being limited to 1 of only 2 possible spaces.
Analyze further. Since R is limited to 3 and 4, Y is also limited to 2 or 3, and T is limited to 1 or 2. So we have 2 additional employees being limited to 1 of only 2 possible spaces.
Analyze further.
Put R in 3.
_T_ _Y_ _R_ ___ ___ ___
1 2 3 4 5 6
By rule 2, S can only be in 4 or 5, and X can only be in 5 or 6, because we need to leave a space for V. V can be in 4, 5, or 6.
Put R in 4.
___ ___ ___ _R_ ___ ___
1 2 3 4 5 6
By rule 2, S can be in 1, 2, or 3 (swappable with T, Y), which forces X to be in 5 or 6. V will be in 5 or 6, whichever is unoccupied by X.
If S is in 5, X can only be in 6. V is forced to be in 1, 2, or 3 (whichever is unoccupied by T, Y).
So, we have X as the other employee with only 1 of 2 possible spaces, i.e., 5 and 6. S can be in 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, whereas V can be in 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6.
Total, we have 4 employees: R, Y, T, and X that are limited to 1 out of 2 possible spaces.
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___
1 2 3 4 5 6
Then write out the rules:
1) & 3) T < Y < R
2) S < X
4) R must be 1, 2, 3, 4
Now analyze.
Since R > Y > T, we must leave 2 spaces for T and Y. That means R can only be in 3 or 4. We have 1 employee being limited to 1 of only 2 possible spaces.
Analyze further. Since R is limited to 3 and 4, Y is also limited to 2 or 3, and T is limited to 1 or 2. So we have 2 additional employees being limited to 1 of only 2 possible spaces.
Analyze further.
Put R in 3.
_T_ _Y_ _R_ ___ ___ ___
1 2 3 4 5 6
By rule 2, S can only be in 4 or 5, and X can only be in 5 or 6, because we need to leave a space for V. V can be in 4, 5, or 6.
Put R in 4.
___ ___ ___ _R_ ___ ___
1 2 3 4 5 6
By rule 2, S can be in 1, 2, or 3 (swappable with T, Y), which forces X to be in 5 or 6. V will be in 5 or 6, whichever is unoccupied by X.
If S is in 5, X can only be in 6. V is forced to be in 1, 2, or 3 (whichever is unoccupied by T, Y).
So, we have X as the other employee with only 1 of 2 possible spaces, i.e., 5 and 6. S can be in 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, whereas V can be in 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6.
Total, we have 4 employees: R, Y, T, and X that are limited to 1 out of 2 possible spaces.