-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 139
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Question] Does "Disperse siblings" change the interval or the value of S? #439
Comments
It's pretty hard to quantity the effect of seeing a sibling on other related cards. |
I know, but I still think that changing S makes more sense than only changing the interval. |
Now that I think about it, it would make rescheduling really complicated because the add-on would have to go not just through the card's own history but through the histories of all of its siblings too. |
My data have 6 cards for each word ... I've already share with @L-M-Sherlock I think this decks is useful to help this. This improvement is much relevant for languages learners ... Also this data have many post-due study history. My cards, in the front side, have: 1 - Word in target language This is the reason behind open-spaced-repetition/fsrs4anki-helper#232 to know retention by notes. Maybe, the relationship between itens is the key for #352 The relationship between itens can affect D or make a new component of memory: The Quality of Item The Quality of item can be 'how many connections this item have in the memory'. We know if the information have context, this is more easy to remember. This is why we need create a good flashcards with images, sounds etc. Unlike SuperMemo, Anki have this amazing feature called 'sibling'. We make a note, and Anki create many cards related. This is a good way to say 'this item is related to this another one'. And maybe we can use this to bypass the 'improve D' challenge. Just an "out of the box" idea to help |
How would we quantify it though? I can't think of any way to put a number on it. |
Every time you answer a sibling, you is saying to system, the relationship between them. This is connections measure. The R or S or D between them maybe a new variable in this equation. |
Well, maybe in the future we'll try to take siblings into account when calculating S. |
@L-M-Sherlock if you don't plan to include a new variable and/or parameter to account for the effect of reviewing a sibling, you can close this issue. I assume taking that into account would require completely changing the optimizer, since it will have to go not only through the history of the card itself (like right now) but also through the history of all of its siblings in order to calculate DSR values. |
I think this is a important issue. Now days, i'm in a like Easy Hell problem with my decks. More than 1000 reviews to do. This deck only use FSRS. I don't know how can optimize this, but siblings is the most reasonable way to me. |
Does every single one of your cards have multiple siblings? Because otherwise I doubt that it would be that much of an issue. |
Yes, every single card have 8 siblings 😣 |
Could you share some contents of them? |
Yes, off course ... Here the all deck, with all the revision history: |
@L-M-Sherlock you made any change about this? Or close because we have no solution at this point? |
I close this issue because I haven't any solution at this point. And the current architecture of FSRS doesn't support updating siblings' stability. |
Research
Enter an [x] character to confirm the points below:
Question
When a sibling gets dispersed, does it affect the interval without affecting S? If that's so, then I think it should be changed. I believe that seeing a sibling increases the stability of all related cards, hence the value of S must be changed, not just the interval length.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: