Skip to main content

Caterpillar Logic

This is a very nice afternoon’s pastime.

Caterpillar Logic is designed as a tool to help train people in inductive reasoning: given a few data points that show some cases that follow a rule and some cases that do not (in this case fourteen multicolored caterpillars, seven that follow the rule and seven that do not), find the rationale behind their categorization.  “I believe that it is a good idea to develop inductive reasoning skills in games,” says the developer, because “scientists use it to form hypotheses and theories.” 

The game begins by giving you two sets of seven multicolored caterpillars, each caterpillar has one to six segments and segment can be one of four different colors.  One set follows a simple rule that relates the number and order of the colors on the caterpillars, the other set violates that rule in some way.  By looking at these fourteen examples, you are asked to deduce the rule that fits all of them, and then test your rule by checking fifteen random caterpillars.  The quiz stops when you miss one caterpillar, and that caterpillar goes up on the board.  You are also free to test caterpillars in the caterpillar wizard – or whatever it’s called – to experiment with any questions you might have about what’s going on.  If you can complete the fifteen item quiz, the game assumes you know the rule.

This is probably the flaw in the game: I was able to interpolate through a few of these quizzes without an explicit idea about what the rule was (I may overstate this because I would build up several heuristics, but they weren’t the rule).  And so I felt smarter than I really was.  Since that is a major selling point in a lot of video games, it may not be a flaw for everyone – it allows you to guess your way out of a hard situation.

There are only twenty levels in Caterpillar Logic, so if you pace yourself, you can get a good month out of the game.  Or, if you’re like me and lack self-control, it’s a good afternoon of fun.





 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sleeping Beauties in Theoretical Physics

Thanu Padmanahhan's book, Sleeping Beauties in Theoretical Physics is a great find.  It's reasonably accessible for a technical tome on theoretical physics, it has an interesting framework that makes the connections between chapters on very different subjects coherent, and it covers a number of interesting topics, including ones that I'd thought I'd have references to in other books but my knowledge of them must have come from papers. The feature that Padmanabhan uses to categorize physics is similar to the one used by Griffiths in his Introduction to Electrodynamics:  a cube has eight vertices, and each of these vertices is a type of physical theory.  Each of the eight vertices has one of three Boolean values: gravitation, relativity, and quantum.  If the effect is accounted for, the value is on, if not, it's off.  The vertex where they are all off is Newtonian Mechanics (without gravity) and the far vertex is a Theory of Everything (or somesuch, he calls it...

Vexed

Vexed was a nice find on Netflix. I won't say it is a great detective show, I won't say it is the best comedy, and I won't say it is the best British comedy, but I will say it's worth watching because it was the last funny thing to come out of England. England used to be a place where comedy could be irreverent, where radio programs and television shows poked fun at prevailing pieties.  Current television shows I'm seeing are either so tendentious to be unwatchable, or have an embarrassment-style humor that makes me feel like I'm watching Different Strokes. Vexed seems to have been written just before the UK went stupid. It has two seasons of very different character.  Both have the same male lead, Toby Stephens DI Jack Armstrong, a lazy caricature of a chauvinistic detective, and the female lead changes between seasons, but present two different kinds of competent woman.  In the first season the lead is Lucy Punch as DI Kate Bishop, an accomplished insp...