Does the SRS adjust intervals based on the user's recall of a LingQ?

I’m trying to understand how the SRS system works. I’ve read this link http://lingqcentral-en.lingq.com/lingq-srs and done some experiments, and there is one part of the system that doesn’t make sense to me. When reviewing LingQs on the first pass, I initially mark them as “Oops” or “Got it”. Once I have marked a LingQ as correct two times in a row it disappears from the list. The LingQs I got wrong, are repeated in subsequent passes until I managed to get them right twice in a row and them I am done.

This is all fine, but the part that I don’t understand, is that when I check the status of the LingQs afterwards all of them have increased their status by one, regardless of whether I had gotten them correct on the initial pass or not. I was expecting that only the LingQs I got correctly twice without mistakes would increase their status and those I got wrong would keep their status. Is this the expected behavior?

This system doesn’t seem to take into account how well I know a LingQ as they are all increased by one status every time they are tested regardless of how well I remember them. If this is this case, I think it’s misleading to call this an SRS system as every other system I’ve seen (Anki, SuperMemo, Mnemosyne, FullRecall, etc.) adjust the repetition based on the user’s level of recall. The LingQ system simply advances the word to the next status every time it is seen.

I believe that @Veral was complaining about this issue a while back in this thread, http://www.lingq.com/forum/4/13080/?page=1, but my impression is that the admin’s never really understood what she was trying to say and she eventually gave up try to explain it to them.

Anyway, I hope that you understood what I’m trying to say. I think this would be a simple change that would improve the LingQ system tremendously.

Please let me know what you think or if there was something that didn’t make sense.

Cheers,
Ben

@gerdemb - The system increases the status if you test it correctly twice in a row. I recommend you go through your list of cards twice and those you recognize both times will increase and those you don’t will stay the same. Don’t test them all until they disappear if you don’t want the status for all the terms to increase. You will see those words again in future review sessions and in current and future lessons. They will eventually become learned if they occur frequently enough. Our system is not about memorizing words but is about encountering words in different contexts including review sessions so that you eventually learn them. Trying to nail all words down is not recommended.

@mark OK, I see how this could be a workaround, but I don’t think the way the system works is obvious. New users familiar with other SRS systems will expect the system here to work similarly when in reality it doesn’t. Only if you use this trick of stopping after two passes will it take into account the user’s recall of a certain word like every other SRS system out there. Is there something wrong my suggestion of not advancing the status of words the users have missed?

I understand that the LingQ system is not about memorizing words, but I also thought the LingQ was about allowing the learner to be flexible in the way they want to learn. I agree with you (and Steve) that trying to nail down words with flashcards is probably not the best way to learn, but I don’t see why that should prevent improvements in the system that exists.

@mark

Also, your proposed workaround doesn’t work correctly with status 4 LingQs as these need to be marked correctly only once before they are removed from the study list. If I am working with a list of LingQs and if any of them have status 4, I cannot go through the list twice as I risk removing the status 4 LingQs even though I may have gotten them wrong the first time. These are precisely the LingQs that I am the most concerned about as sometimes you have a word that you think you’ve memorized in status 4, but in reality you’ve forgotten it.

@gerdemb - We appreciate the feedback and at some point we would like to improve our SRS system to make it more flexible as you suggest. There are many things we would like to do so we will have to get to it when we can. In the meantime, you will have to develop your own workarounds to get the SRS system to do what you would like it to do including manual adjustment of status which is very easy to do at any time.

If I come across a known lingQ (4) that I have forgotten I just change it’s status back to 1 until I have learned it or I decide to make it a 2 because I’m having trouble learning it.

1 Like