The Stackz Concept > Stackz - New Feature Requests

Is an update planned to create a more sophisticated RepeatAdvisor?

<< < (3/3)

The day this new feature was implemented I revived all of my StackZ! files and completely uninstalled Anki.  For me and my learning it represents a real upgrade from when I started using StackZ! 2.5 years ago.

However, there's a poorly implemented feature of Anki that StackZ! could implement very very well.  What I am about to describe is currently implemented on the website Remembering the Kanji.

In total there are 7 stacks.  There are the five stacks that we are all familiar with that give us an overview of how well we know any particular card.  However in RtK there is a stack for cards we have not yet studied or learned.  There is also another stack for cards that we used to know, but have recently failed.

Since programmatically these two new stacks are the same I'll just call it Stack 0.  Stack 0 only has two states.  Never learned and learned (but failed).  Regardless of their state all cards in Stack 0 move to Stack 1 when they are studied and answered "Yes, I know this".

From a user perspective I think the easiest way to visualize this to have seven stacks total.  The far left being cards you have never studied and learn and the one to the right of that being cards that used to be in the main StackZ! but have been failed and need to be restudied.

Thus, in principle, you would use the "Study/Learn" mode of StackZ! on the left two stacks and the "Test" mode on the right 5.

Alternatively, since changing the number of stacks might be a pain from the interface perspective it would still be nice to allow this sort of visualization.  That is the first stack is never studied cards, the second is failed cards, the next two are the same as the current second and third stacks, then the final stack is a combination of the last three stacks.  (This system only works well if you start doubling the time taken after stack 3.  Since research shows that's a good system anyway it's not a big limitation.)

Thank you for your continuous useful input, Tarix!

In fact it was only three days ago when I started implementing what I have mentioned in this thread more than one year ago:

--- Quote from: Chris on June 07, 2007, 02:18:51 AM ---Note:
The extended fail/pass function, translated to the Stackz world, would be a "directly send to level x". This would speed up the classification, but at the cost of lower accuracy (the success ratio is based on repeated tests). In addition, the user interface would become more complex, which we try very very hard to keep at an absolute minimum. But this has been requested before, and if more people wish it, we will introduce that one day. But not in the next release :-)

--- End quote ---

Now the time of this feature has finally come, and I think I found a way to integrate the new feature seamlessly in the existing context.

I added a new "promotion system" called "manual distribution" that painlessly extends the existing two promotion systems:

Now the bigger departure is to get rid of the arrow buttons in the study dialogs. If this system is selected, we need some sort of direct "send to" buttons.
Something like that:

Note that you can define your own labels for the five levels and use them for whatever purpose you want. Of course it makes sense to use this in combination with the RepeatAdvisor ColorMode, where you can define the repetition delay for each level individually:

I feel that there is little complexity added to the program; in fact many existing concepts can be easily extended with the new ideas.

Things that must be sorted out are:

* In this mode, one would probably expect that the entries are refreshed even if moved to the left. Stackz up to now only considers a positive test as a relevant point in time; negative tests are not resetting the appearance delay of a card (it may come at a later day if moved to a column with a longer delay, but the wait period will only consist of the delay difference). Now I feel that this will have to change for the new mode - if the card is sent to a level on the left, it should NOT appear until the entire waiting time of that level is over - after all I sent it intentionally to that column with that delay in mind. That's why I tried adding the option "Mark entries as refreshed" on the bottom of the first screenshot. Currently it's hardcoded to the suboptimal version as the checked radio button indicates.
* Now this "mark entries as refreshed" option could become a global option, allowing the user to adjust the refresh style for the other modes as well. I guess then it would be easier to understand for a new user because the overall feature would be more symmetric..?
* Another side effect comes from the fact that the proposed design intentionally allows treating the 5 levels as unrelated decks of cards, not necessairly as linked steps in a process. I could e.g. name them according to the days of the week, and simply process the "due stack" each day, manually pushing the card to the day when I will review it again. Or I might want to separate the words according to their importance... or any other criterion, I'm sure the users will have other ideas. And the existing concept would allow that without problems as long as the user knows what he is doing. BUT: what happens to the "success count", "failure count", "success ratio" color modes? These statistics are built when moving the cards across the levels... The flexibility of allowing arbitrary level purposes introduces a problem here... one solution would be to add another option to indicte the type of dependency between the chosen level names, e.g. a checkbox "[ ] levels represent increasing proficiency" or something like that...
OK there were many thoughts in here, I hope it was not too confusing. It's mainly a "flexibility versus complexity" tradeoff.
It would be interesting to hear your comments! I will upload the current version in the latest version section for anyone interesteed.


[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version