Skip to content

Keeping track on duplicates. Should your SuperMemo collection only be yours?

June 13, 2009

The problem:

I constantly update many items and articles (topics) into my collection. I put medicine related in one whole collection category (I keep track of categories, such as cardiology, using tags). But items do go there at once.

Once new items get out of my desktop collection (where I create and edit all new items, or put new articles) they go into a “Pending for sharing” category. When ever I have time or my partner for study is willing to take on more items, I share the items in this “pending for sharing” category by transferring a branch.

Once the items are transferred to my partner’s collection I reset the history of repetitions on his collection. When I get home I just move the elements from the folder I transferred to my partner into my “residency collection”. I’ve done this process many times, but lately I started to wonder is there an easier and functional way.

Yesterday I added a whole 9 articles, that I haven’t remember I did before (“low” priority of course, double quotes meaning notting goes into SuperMemo that isn’t important enough). Of course I had to search for a fragment of the text (title mainly) and find each article.

The questions:

How do you keep track of the elements you share with SuperMemo. How do you know some was already added to you collection before.

In SuperMemo, there is no way to find duplicates or is it? How do you tranfer items or topics with friends or family on a constant changing basis?

5 Comments leave one →
  1. LittleFish permalink
    June 13, 2009 15:13

    I’ve never shared my Supermemo collection with anybody and nobody has ever given me their collection (That would be pretty awesome, though). I’m not sure how I would go about doing that…

  2. gersapa permalink*
    June 17, 2009 10:20

    Maybe your Collection should be your collection. I was talking more about sharing a little piece of it.

    There a some sites where flashcards are shared, but not you don’t always find information from the same source as you usually need. And this flashcards almost never have sources. Of course de facto information don’t need sources. yet this is more a personal requirement based on personal needs.

    I was wondering if it is possible to build a great collection by several people (at least two) in a collaborative manner using supermemo. I acknowledge that several conventions of what to input or not have to be establish first; but, how can this be implemented, or even can it be implemented with current supermemo?

  3. June 23, 2009 02:17

    I think it could be hard to share IR collection as the process of preparing extracts and items depends on the present knowledge. So two people would extract and itemize different passages. Surely one could add some discipline and process everything that even seems to be useful in learning. This can yet result in overgrowth, from single article there would be hundreds of items, though only a few can be interesting.

    It’s a pity though that original Supermemo never introduced sharing of any kind.

    • gersapa permalink*
      June 23, 2009 06:24

      Robert, you took my question to a new level. That’s great and is the reason this blog was made. Not to much people use the powerfulness of SuperMemo so I had to dig trough the net with not much success and started the blog.

      You mention some sort of wiki like collaborative item making. I agree on you that reading the same article by two or more people would increase the number of items. Yet this still would be and advantage if certain constrains about the type of info to included was establish beforehand. This mostly would apply to certain type of study like preparing for a specific test, mostly when there is a lot to remember.

      I was more oriented to the idea of reading different chapters or subjects by different people at the time then sharing items. Hence you could start next subject by first trying out the questions solve by your peer and afterwords make your own. If three people where involve, after finishing the tree first subjects all would exchange missing items. I find to much work for this to be easily done on more then two people, which is how I’m studying now.

      XML could make sharing effective but not easy and specially not fast. And if I’m concerned with the idea of loosing time typing, imagine how I feel to tell someone first study xml then we can collaborate.

      • June 24, 2009 02:28

        You’re right – I thought about the toughest form of collaboration, but it can be simplified. There would be clear constraints, for instance each person prepares different chapters.

        Well this could work in the following way:
        – each person has two collections: learning and development. Only developement collections are exchanged (I mean uploaded etc) and everybody imports others’ developement collections. Yet everyone would have to delete items that are unnecessary and excessive (at least for him).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: