Further my post of Mar 8, 2013 12:38 PM, the following may do with some elucidation: > Robert Hansen (RH) posted Mar 8, 2013 7:40 AM: > > That is a very hard problem. I managed to figure > out > > weighings 1 and 3 but could not complete that > > middle > > step. This is not a binary search, it is an > > exhaustive search. <snip> > For 'out-of-the-box' thinking, the OPMS approach > could be quite useful, assuming one has an 'open > mind' to begin with - and one is willing to look at > and try to understand 'structural models' based on > the "CONTRIBUTES TO" and "HINDERS" relationships. > I should be careful not to give the impression that, when one is stuck with a problem such as this, just trying out the OPMS will do the trick for you. NOT SO AT ALL!!!
OPMS could possibly "lead to" the 'open-minded' frame of thinking that could help, over time, to bring one to the kind of out-of-the-box thinking that could help provide the little insights that may help resolve the tricky problem under consideration.
But - at the same time - we have also seen that one has to be somewhat 'open-minded' even to try out the OPMS at all.
There seems to be some complexity here that may not be readily or easily resolved.
In any case, the advice is: DON'T try to use the OPMS to help resolve any problem of this kind. It is, in fact, contra-indicated.