On Friday 20 February 2009 18:44:05 Francisco José Fiuza Lima Júnior wrote:
> What do you think Peter? Again, the best way of doing that would be through a plugin. It won't be difficult to write a new scheduler where you can adapt all these scaling variables to your heart's content. Peter > Best Regards, > > Frank > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Oisín Mac Fhearaí > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > 2009/2/19 Francisco José Fiuza Lima Júnior <[email protected]>: > > > It doesn't make that much sense now. > > > > > > Let's say the interval for a card is 50 days, and I grade it 2 because > > > I > > > > got > > > > > it barely correct. > > > Will it be better to: > > > > > > 1) increase the interval to 60 days and let me forget it on the next > > > > time, > > > > > 2) or decrease it to 40 days and give it a grade 3 next time because I > > > didn't leave it for too long? > > > > > > I think the option 2 is better, because if the interval always > > > increases, I'll eventually forget it one day, and then, I'll have to > > > start all over like a fresh card. Is it how it works? I know that when > > > I forget a card, > > > > it > > > > > starts all over from interval of 1, 2 , 3 days... > > > > You're making an assumption here that you will eventually forget the > > card by grading it 2 under the current scheme. Have you done any > > statistical analysis to see whether this is true? > > > > The big problem I see with your conclusion is that you SUCCESSFULLY > > answered the card, even if it was difficult. If you successfully > > reviewed the card once after 50 days even with difficulty, why do you > > think you will be LESS likely to answer it correctly after another 50 > > days? This is the basis of spaced repetition systems! > > > > > It doesn't seem reasonable to increase the interval if I'm not > > > > comfortable > > > > > with the card... > > > 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. > > > > That's what it already attempts to do. You shouldn't declare the > > algorithm incorrect on this issue without providing some proof. > > > > > Another example. I grade one card 5 and the next interval was set to > > > 100 days. When that time comes, I was about to forget the card and > > > grade it > > > > 2. > > > > > Why do you think that if in 100 days a grade 5 card dropped to 2, > > > > increasing > > > > > it to 130 days will do any good? I'm 99% sure that after those 130 days > > > > I'll > > > > > forget the card... > > > > According to the material I've read on spaced repetition systems, > > "about to forget the card" is the OPTIMUM time to review it, so that > > the knowledge moves into your long-term memory quickest. > > > > You may be "99% sure" that you will forget the card after 130 days, > > but that's not good enough without actually performing experiments and > > verifying one way or another. If this has really happened to you many > > times, you should document it carefully - but if not, being so sure > > based simply on an assumption or feeling is not a good enough reason > > to say "the algorithm should be changed". > > > > Oisín > > ------------------------------------------------ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
