2 ms·

> claiming that algorithm does not matter, especially from people without experience actually using both. Here's the basis of that claim [1]. That said, I hav

by wenc 6y ago

> claiming that algorithm does not matter, especially from people without experience actually using both. Here's the basis of that claim [1]. That said, I have not tested it empirically myself so I think that is cause for moderating my claim -- I place a high value on empirically-tested knowledge. Take my claim as partially withdrawn. But to make the argument more precise, an algorithm producing a lower rep load because it uses intervals more efficiently does not imply it produces a significant delta-difference in retention. It merely means the algorithm lets you fit more stuff into a memorization schedule. That seems to be to be quite different from improving retention itself of say a smaller inventory of facts. Just wanted to be sure about the actual claim that is made. p.s. one of your links is broken. [1] http://learninglab.psych.purdue.edu/downloads/2011_Karpicke_Bauernschmidt_JEPLMC.pdf http://learninglab.psych.purdue.edu/downloads/2011_Karpicke_...

lupin3ken 6y ago
> Here's the basis of that claim [1]. Based on a skim of the paper, this experiment seems to only plan out how individuals study material on the same day, not distributed over a period of time that lasts multiple days. In order to test how much of the material was retained in long-term memory, they tested the subjects on the material again after one week. Spaced Repetition software (anki, mnemosyne, and supermemo) will distribute the learning across multiple days regardless of the algorithm they use. I don't believe the paper cited is using the same testing method that SRS systems use. Piotr Wozniak (the creator of Supermemo) has collaborated on a couple of papers regarding this topic. I have not found many researchers who are studying it and creating algorithms in quite the same way. There are a few papers cited in a blog post / self-published supermemo wiki here [1] that discuss a proposed two-component model of memory that explain in greater detail why learning on increasing intervals of time (days, not in the structure of repetitions on the same day) can lead to a higher stability of memory. [1] https://supermemo.guru/wiki/Two_components_of_memory https://supermemo.guru/wiki/Two_components_of_memory

by wenc 6y ago

lupin3ken 6y ago

> Here's the basis of that claim [1]. Based on a skim of the paper, this experiment seems to only plan out how individuals study material on the same day, not distributed over a period of time that lasts multiple days. In order to test how much of the material was retained in long-term memory, they tested the subjects on the material again after one week. Spaced Repetition software (anki, mnemosyne, and supermemo) will distribute the learning across multiple days regardless of the algorithm they use. I don't believe the paper cited is using the same testing method that SRS systems use. Piotr Wozniak (the creator of Supermemo) has collaborated on a couple of papers regarding this topic. I have not found many researchers who are studying it and creating algorithms in quite the same way. There are a few papers cited in a blog post / self-published supermemo wiki here [1] that discuss a proposed two-component model of memory that explain in greater detail why learning on increasing intervals of time (days, not in the structure of repetitions on the same day) can lead to a higher stability of memory. [1] https://supermemo.guru/wiki/Two_components_of_memory https://supermemo.guru/wiki/Two_components_of_memory