Also Peter has previously stated that in 2.0 it will be easier to change the algorithm via a plugin.
- Jason On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Francisco José Fiuza Lima Júnior <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > 100% agreed. SM2 as it is, is wonderful. I'm getting incredible results with > it, and I'm really happy. Thank you for your hard work. I'll hopefully join > the dev team when I finish my studies (probably in 3 years). > > 2.0 should be the priority instead of tweaking the algorithm. > > Tweaking the algorithm will probably give you the same result reading maybe > 10% less cards. It's not that big deal! > > Regards, > > Frank > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Peter Bienstman <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> I just took the existing SM2 algorithm as it is. >> >> It is quite possible that what you propose makes more sense, but then, my >> intention is only to change the algorithm significantly once a >> statistically >> relevant analysis of all the gathered indicates that that is the way to >> go. >> >> At the moment, I'm focusing on 2.0, though, as opposed to analysing the >> logs. >> >> Peter >> >> On Thursday 19 February 2009 8:19:29 Francisco José Fiuza Lima Júnior >> wrote: >> > I disagree! >> > >> > What is the point of increasing the interval if you barely remembered it >> > giving a grade 2? Increasing the interval, you will most likely forget >> > it >> > and grade it 1 on the next time, and you will have to start all over >> > again, >> > from 1 - 2 days repetition. >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:01 PM, querido >> > <[email protected]>wrote: >> > > On Feb 19, 9:28 am, Francisco José Fiuza Lima Júnior >> > > >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > In my opinion, the algorithm should find an ideal interval for a >> > > > card, >> > > > increasing or decreasing it so that you give it a grade 4. >> > > >> > > I understand, but hopefully this "ideal interval" can stretched, by >> > > some factor, longer and longer until the memory becomes "permanent". >> > > It wouldn't be too hard to remember the card for the same interval >> > > again, so the sensation of difficulty, and your progress, should be >> > > thought of as caused by this stretching. Why do you want it to be >> > > hard? Because this accelerates the process of separating the hard >> > > cards from the easy ones. They get separated when you fail the hard >> > > ones. Stretching enough to cause you to fail some, but not too many, >> > > is the ideal, because the easy ones are getting pushed out of the way. >> > > >> > > Failing cards is part of the process that concentrates the hard cards >> > > at short intervals: you focus on the hard cards by failing them, while >> > > the easy cards fly off into the future. >> > > >> > > The algorithm can't be perfect for each individual card, but I am >> > > confident that it offers a very effective general policy for a large >> > > stack of cards, to prioritize your work for you. >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------ >> Peter Bienstman >> Ghent University, Dept. of Information Technology >> Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 41, B-9000 Gent, Belgium >> tel: +32 9 264 34 46, fax: +32 9 264 35 93 >> WWW: http://photonics.intec.UGent.be >> email: [email protected] >> ------------------------------------------------ >> >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mnemosyne-proj-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mnemosyne-proj-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
