On Wednesday 01 July 2009 02:24:39 pm Ben wrote: > But won't the algorithm will only behave like A if you keep getting > the card right?
Yes, good catch, I was assuming that you made no errors. > Assuming the ideal sequence is as in B, then by > definition when mnemosyne asks you about the card after a period > longer than a year, you won't do well. So won't the actual interval > bounce around the ideal interval? For instance, suppose the ideal > interval is always 1 year. I thought Mnemosyne would behave like > this: > > Mnemosyne Internal Grade User > (in years) Gives Card > .5 5 > 1 4 > 1.3 2 > 1.1 3 > .9 4 > 1.1 3 > 1.0 4 > 1.2 3 > ... ... > > The numbers are just illustrations, but I thought Mnemosyne would > shorten the interval if you gave the card less than a 4, and would > lengthen it if you gave the card a 4 or 5. So if the ideal interval > is always 1 yr, won't Mnemosyne will approximate that, at least to > some degree? Actually, in your example all the grades are 'pass' grades. And even if you grade a card 2, the interval will still lengthen a bit, but not as much as with higher grades. Cheers, Peter --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
