Interrelating Cards

[Betsemes]

I'm using mnemosyne to learn Lojban; but maybe this will benefit learners of other languages/topics. In Lojban, we have a list of primitives, some of them having associated afix forms used to form compound words. In order to learn the infixes, I have to create one front-to-back card to ask for the afixes of a primitive and yet another one for the reverse. In order to make sure I'm asking for the right thing, I've only have the choice of creating two separate cards. This is not optimal, since the program doesn't know those cards are interrelated and thus, it may ask for them even one after the other. It would be better to be able to tell the program they are interrelated, so that the program could put enough time distance between them. I'm sure there are other subjects where this could be put to good use, so I think it would be a good feature to add.

[Peter Bienstman]

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback!

This issue pops up now and then, but I'm afraid that adding such a
feature would complicate both the code and user interface a lot.
Moreover, I'm not sure this is really necessary, as after a few reps
these cards will tend to diverge in schedule anyway...

Cheers,

Peter

[Betsemes]

The only workaround I have thought of and the one I have been using is
intentionally rating the related card either "0" or "1" when it shows
up too early after to force it to be delayed and be repeated within
the same session. This messes up the statistics, so if we don't care
much for statistics as myself, this is an okay solution, but
unaceptable for your memory research project, I think; if you want
accurate and reliable data, of course. So as I see this problem, it
affects mostly your data reliability and it would lead your research
to be questionable.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "mnemosyne-proj-users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to mnemosyne-...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> mnemosyne-proj-u...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>

[Peter Bienstman]

On 08/31/2012 03:36 PM, Betsemes wrote:
> The only workaround I have thought of and the one I have been using is
> intentionally rating the related card either "0" or "1" when it shows
> up too early after to force it to be delayed and be repeated within
> the same session. This messes up the statistics, so if we don't care
> much for statistics as myself, this is an okay solution, but
> unaceptable for your memory research project, I think; if you want
> accurate and reliable data, of course. So as I see this problem, it
> affects mostly your data reliability and it would lead your research
> to be questionable.

The submitted science data is about millions and millions of cards, so
the effects we are talking about are really in the noise :-)

Peter