Where Does Your Logic Rank on the Global Scale?
Syllogisms, sequences, and one runaway sheep stand between you and your global logic rank.
Right now, someone somewhere is confidently wrong about a train puzzle. The planet's supply of logic is unevenly distributed, and we built a scale to measure your share of it. Seven puzzles await: syllogisms, patterns, one sheep-related incident. Each has exactly one correct answer, no tricks about the grading.
Read carefully, reason slowly, and resist the option that winks at you first — puzzle writers know precisely which answer winks. When it's over, you'll get a rank on our leaderboard, which is extremely official in the sense that we made it ourselves.
Read every possible result and what it means →
Inspect the scoring, question by question
The highest possible score here is 21. The original game divides scores into 4 bands; the bands contain different numbers of answer combinations. A high point total is not a measured percentile.
1. A sequence begins 3, 6, 12, 24. What comes next?
- 36 — 2 original points
- 30 — 1 original points
- 48 — 3 original points
- Nothing — that's clearly a phone number — 0 original points
These are the archived game’s option weights. Partial credit is a game rule, not a clinical or population measurement.
2. Every zib is a yolm. No yolm can swim. Can a zib swim?
- No — no zib can swim — 3 original points
- Yes, with enough training — 0 original points
- Only some zibs can — 1 original points
- Impossible to say from this alone — 2 original points
These are the archived game’s option weights. Partial credit is a game rule, not a clinical or population measurement.
3. If it rains, the picnic gets cancelled. The picnic was not cancelled. What do you know for certain?
- Nothing can be known for certain — 2 original points
- It did not rain — 3 original points
- It rained, but gently enough to ignore — 1 original points
- The picnic cancelled the rain — 0 original points
These are the archived game’s option weights. Partial credit is a game rule, not a clinical or population measurement.
4. Which is the odd one out: triangle, square, pentagon, circle?
- Pentagon — it has the most sides — 2 original points
- Triangle — it has the fewest sides — 1 original points
- Square — it's too mainstream — 0 original points
- Circle — it's the only one without corners — 3 original points
These are the archived game’s option weights. Partial credit is a game rule, not a clinical or population measurement.
5. A letter pattern runs A, C, F, J. What comes next?
- N — 2 original points
- O — 3 original points
- M — 1 original points
- J again — it liked it there — 0 original points
These are the archived game’s option weights. Partial credit is a game rule, not a clinical or population measurement.
6. Two days after tomorrow is Friday. What day is it today?
- Tuesday — 3 original points
- Wednesday — 2 original points
- Monday — 1 original points
- Friday — it's always Friday somewhere — 0 original points
These are the archived game’s option weights. Partial credit is a game rule, not a clinical or population measurement.
7. A farmer counts 17 sheep. All but 9 wander off. How many remain?
- 8 — 2 original points
- 26 — 1 original points
- 9 — 3 original points
- Zero — sheep respect a group decision — 0 original points
These are the archived game’s option weights. Partial credit is a game rule, not a clinical or population measurement.
What happens across every possible answer pattern?
We counted all 16,384 patterns, treating each offered choice as equally likely. This is a synthetic rule check, not visitor research. It does not describe how real people answer.
| Result | Patterns | Share of patterns |
|---|---|---|
| The Speed-Runner | 323 | 1.97% |
| Solidly Mid-Table, Globally Speaking | 7,869 | 48.03% |
| Top-Ten-Percent Energy | 7,456 | 45.51% |
| The One-Percent Reasoner | 736 | 4.49% |
Download the full counts · Download Python script · Download rule inputs
To reproduce locally: python3 measure_legacy.py --input legacy-rule-inputs.json --output counts.json. Uses Python 3 and its standard library.
There is no global league table for reasoning
Let us clear the framing away first, because it is the most entertaining fiction on this page. No organisation ranks the world's population by logical ability. There is no register, no standard instrument and no percentile you could meaningfully be placed in from seven multiple-choice questions. The tiers below are written the way a pub quiz writes its categories: for the pleasure of the label.
The rule almost everybody breaks
The picnic question is formal logic wearing casual clothes. From if it rains the picnic is cancelled, plus the fact that it was not cancelled, you may conclude it did not rain. Logicians call that modus tollens and it is airtight. Run it the other way and you fall through the floor: learning the picnic was cancelled tells you nothing about the weather, since a hundred other things cancel picnics.
Peter Wason built his 1966 card task around this asymmetry. Four cards show A, K, 4 and 7, and the rule claims a card with a vowel on one side has an even number on the other. The cards to turn are the vowel and the odd number, yet fewer than one person in ten picks that pair, most reaching for the even number that could never disprove anything. Dress the identical structure in a familiar rule about drinking ages, as Richard Griggs and James Cox did in 1982, and most people solve it easily. Only the subject matter changed.
When believing an answer beats checking it
This is also why syllogisms about zibs and yolms use nonsense words. Research by Jonathan Evans and colleagues in 1983 found that people accept invalid arguments with believable conclusions and reject valid ones with absurd conclusions, judging the destination rather than the road. Strip out anything you could have an opinion about, and the structure has nowhere to hide.
How to actually get better at this
Separate the premises from the conclusion, on paper if the puzzle is fiddly. Then ask an awkward question: does this follow, or does it merely feel likely? Hunt for a single counterexample, since one is enough to sink an argument, and distrust any option that arrives with a pleasant sense of recognition.
None of that requires talent. Deductive reasoning is unusually teachable, and performance on puzzles like these responds to practice within a few sittings. What it is not is a measurement of your intelligence, nor any indication of your brain's health. Enjoy the rank, then leave it here.
Reading context & limits
For background and a fuller source trail, read Are Online IQ and Brain Tests Accurate?. These references provide context; they do not validate the entertainment result or every historical detail in the archived essay.
- Evidence and brain-training claims — FTC
- Intelligence — American Psychological Association
- IQ — Encyclopaedia Britannica
Content lead: LISA. Updated October 25, 2026. Send a specific factual correction.