While you use the software, detailed statistics can be kept on your learning process. If you want, these logs can be uploaded in a transparent and anonymous way to a central server for analysis.
This data will be valuable to study the behaviour of our memory over a very long time period. As an additional benefit, the results will be used to improve the scheduling algorithms behind the software even further.
Does anybody here know how efficient the current scheduling is already, or how much differences there are between different people/topics/whatever?
Does anybody here know how efficient the current scheduling is already,
Mnemosyne uses one of the older Supermemo SRS algorithms; Peter (the Mnemosyne dev) has said in the past that the more recent & complicated Supermemo algorithms offer little advantage.
or how much differences there are between different people/topics/whatever?
I dunno. The relevant statistic is probably ‘easiness’. IIRC, there is in fact a deck-wide easiness factor that is slowly adjusted to deal with users who systematically make very slowly or very quickly learned cards. You could try looking at the torrent of Mnemosyne statistics and see how widely that statistic varies from person to person?
One only slightly related question: from http://www.mnemosyne-proj.org/:
Does anybody here know how efficient the current scheduling is already, or how much differences there are between different people/topics/whatever?
Mnemosyne uses one of the older Supermemo SRS algorithms; Peter (the Mnemosyne dev) has said in the past that the more recent & complicated Supermemo algorithms offer little advantage.
I dunno. The relevant statistic is probably ‘easiness’. IIRC, there is in fact a deck-wide easiness factor that is slowly adjusted to deal with users who systematically make very slowly or very quickly learned cards. You could try looking at the torrent of Mnemosyne statistics and see how widely that statistic varies from person to person?