This is a very interesting question.
http://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa14/e140826aFinal01568.pdf is an example of serious research surrounding what the authors call "relation logic" or "relational logic" - see p. 15 or p. 29 for examples. The idea is that a puzzle (which figure doesn't belong?) can be answered in different ways by different types ...
(Not a guess at any specific answer that the question's poser had in mind.)
The more the merrier.
Different solutions have different virtues.
Eventually every solution will be appreciated
by some puzzle lover.
Solutions have a variety of virtues
Far from being exhaustive or mutually exclusive,
these qualities are
Suppose it was the opposite: you had the most creative answer, and your friend gave the less creative answer. Then you could:
This way you narrowed the answers to the right one, which is also the most creative one.
I think this is a matter of opinion, but I'm in favor of the most creative answer no matter what, specially for lateral thinking puzzles. So ...
The term is called Argument from silence. It is when a person uses another person's silence (or absense of a statement) as an information in itself and not as just silence.
According to rationalwiki.org:
An argument from silence is an informal fallacy that occurs when someone interprets someone's or something's silence as anything other than silence, ...
I think the answer is probably no.
Here's a much simpler but related problem. You have just two kinds of plants, carrots and tomatoes, on a square grid. Each cell in the grid either prefers carrots (you score +1 for planting carrots there, -1 for planting tomatoes) or prefers tomatoes (other way around). Each adjacent pair of cells either prefers to have ...
As someone with a little bit more of a math background, I call these assumptions constraints. The word comes from optimization, a field studied by both computer scientists and mathematicians. When you write a computer program to solve a problem like determining the most efficient way to schedule trains transporting materials, you provide the program ...
OP: Seems that it was: FIRST PRINCIPLE
Could it be Basic supposition? I've seen it in some (really old) books about philosophy and physics, but the full phrase does not have a Wikipedia entry.
Scratch, that. You are probably searching for Tacit assumption, also known as Implicit assumption
Could it be Unstated assumption as described in ...
Yes, this is possible. It is very possible, in fact. Since you're writing a program for this, I'll use pseudocode, etc. to demonstrate some techniques you should try.
I had to write a sudoku solver for Project Euler #96 a while back in Python, so here's what I did:
Find all the obvious 'Only one value can go in this slot.' places.
For each square, row, ...
I cannot think of any books however, wikipedia has a quite detailed list here.
The website contains a list of links to different puzzle 'genres', and the pages linked to also contain more lists. This is a very broad topic, and some of the puzzles linked to will absolutely use logic. I think what you are looking for is here, it contains information on logic ...
I think in order to force the player to use logic, rather than random moves, you need to make using logic a more attractive route than random guessing. Therefore, I'd suggest you do three things:
Simplify the range of possible moves
Between complex interconnections and the shear number of valid positions, the difficulty will rapidly increase, making it ...
Sequential logic is just logic with feedback. If you look at the image below (not mine but grabbed from the internet), the initial question posed is the input, and everyone's non-responses are the memory in the feedback loop.
This situation is an example of sequential logic insomuch as no one can answer the question without knowing the responses of everyone ...
For the second part of your question, the answer is yes.
Here is an example with this puzzle - Easter Monster - I released in April 2007:
Here is the board after "bare rules" :
pics were taken from this site.
Many hard puzzles have the same property.
See the hardest sudokus database in this thread.
I think there is a perfect solution to your specific query.
Knowing that there are overlaps of pros and cons (benefits/stunts and benefited by/stunted by) you can easily plan your garden.
I'll give an example of 5 plants :
+2 = Mutual benefits
+1 = Benefited By
0 = No Effect
-1 = Stunted By
-2 = Mutual Stunting
Plant A |+2 B|+1 C | 0 |+1 D|-1 E|-2 ...
I heard about the following example of non-rational problem solving.
A dog holds a stick in his mouth. He wants to pass beween the bars of a fence. How can he do it?
I am sure you can explain the solution in very rational terms. But the way people find the solution is by just "seeing" the solution.
Could be axiomatic - an axiom.
An axiom or postulate is a premise or starting point of reasoning. As classically conceived, an axiom is a premise so evident as to be accepted as true without controversy. ... As used in modern logic, an axiom is simply a premise or starting point for reasoning.