I wonder if it would avoid this kind of objection (which always comes up in logic puzzles) if problems was first stated in mathematical terms, and then analogized to a real world scenario. Something like ...
Assume two sets of integers (1..n) and (n+1..100), where 1 <= n <= 100. Your goal is to discover the value of n by asking whether a given number falls within set 1 or set 2. If you propose more than one number that belongs to set 2, you can propose no further numbers. What is the maximum number of proposals necessary to determine n?
If it helps, you can analogize this problem to dropping two fragile objects out of a 100-story building or something. Just don't forget the failure mode of "clever".
Assume two sets of integers (1..n) and (n+1..100), where 1 <= n <= 100. Your goal is to discover the value of n by asking whether a given number falls within set 1 or set 2. If you propose more than one number that belongs to set 2, you can propose no further numbers. What is the maximum number of proposals necessary to determine n?
If it helps, you can analogize this problem to dropping two fragile objects out of a 100-story building or something. Just don't forget the failure mode of "clever".