muflax/muflax65ngodyewp.onion
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/fmap/muflax65ngodyewp.onion synced 2024-07-01 10:46:49 +02:00
Code Issues Releases Wiki Activity

typo

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
muflax 2012-06-29 12:42:22 +02:00
parent d75aaee4d0
commit d42289f155
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
content_daily/log/64.mkd
View file

@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ I implemented [James Tauber's next-best algorithm][graded-reader] for comparison
However, I'm now unconvinced it's even all that more efficient. However, I'm now unconvinced it's even all that more efficient.
For comparison, I'm running this against Le Petit Prince, which has ~2800 unique words and ~1600 sentences. Based on statistics from all other texts I've run this on, it's a completely typical text[^typ]. I assume almost no previous knowledge of the language. Also, we need some redundancy, so every new word must appear on at least 2 dedicated cards if it is unknown, or just 1 if it's already familiar (a related form has featured before). For comparison, I'm running this against Le Petit Prince, which has ~2800 unique words and ~1600 sentences. Based on statistics from all other texts I've run this on, it's a completely typical text. I assume almost no previous knowledge of the language. Also, we need some redundancy, so every new word must appear on at least 2 dedicated cards if it is unknown, or just 1 if it's already familiar (a related form has featured before).
Using the next-best algorithm, you'd cover all ~2800 words with ~3580 cards, giving you 1.29 cards per word. Only 87 sentences are not used. Using the next-best algorithm, you'd cover all ~2800 words with ~3580 cards, giving you 1.29 cards per word. Only 87 sentences are not used.