It seems clear to me that each LSAT AR question (as with LR and RC questions) is described by a single task, but I feel the same cannot be true of the rules associated with each question. That is, the rules are designated by the setup for a particular game (i.e. a group of questions). What's more, there are multiple rules per game. So each question in a given group could have 3 or 4 or more rules associated with it, and all questions in that group would seem to share the same rules. Is that a fair and complete characterization of your system, or do I misunderstand something?This question shows a solid general understanding of how the Zen system breaks down the logic games. The rules are categorized for an entire game, then the question stems are separately categorized. The best analogy is to how other test prep companies keep track of how you do on a reading comprehension passage subject (like law or science), while also paying attention to each question type.
So we use two different but intersecting systems for logic games: how you perform on a given rule type, and how you perform on a question stem type. For instance, some of our clients are great at sequencing games in general, but whenever they are faced with a metacognitive task of redefining a rule, they mess up no matter WHAT kind of game it is. Hope that makes the dual system more clear.
Additionally, I'm not sure I understand the distinctions between some of your rule types and rule strands. For example, what is a "Tree" sequencing rule and how does it differ from a "Conditional" sequencing rule? How does the Assignment strand differ from the Grouping strand?Great questions that I unfortunately haven't had time to create the content to answer! The plan is to continue expanding on the free LSAT PrepTest Score Analysis so that the explanation pages will include explicit instructions on how to diagram a "tree" rule versus a "conditional."
What you are looking for is in the works, I promise!