A new beta is now available, with the headline feature being a new FSRS version. Please give it a try and let us known how you go. It contains the security fixes that were recently released in 25.02.x as well.
If you’re an FSRS user, after updating, optimizing your presets is recommended. The FSRS param count differs from previous releases, and the mobile clients will continue to use the old parameters until the mobile clients get an update, so you may see the same card be given different delays depending on the platform you review on.
On the one hand, I don’t like bikeshedding wording. On the other hand, I really think we should change it to “FSRS can adapt to your memory well”. The latter better conveys that the health check is NOT about the current parameters.
Also regarding the health check: I think UI-wise it’s not nice that it just sits at 100.0% when optimization is done and the health check is in progress, it may make people think that Anki froze. I think it would be better to add a second progress percentage for the health check, or at least just a “Performing health check” text. @A_Blokee
No objections to the wording change, and I agree that some sort of progress should be shown (but if it’s difficult to do, “checking health…” or something would at least give the user an idea something is going on)
Bug report: In the deck options, when playing around with optimize (with and without health check), then closing the window without saving, I get the message dialog if I want to dismiss the changes. Clicking on Yes closes the message dialog, but not the deck options dialog. There is no way to close the deck options dialog without saving.
This happens sporadically, not always. I could not find out how to reproduce it.
Another thing regarding the health check: it doesn’t have it’s own “help modal” or whatever it’s called
Clicking on “Check health when optimizing (slow)” just redirects to the last help modal that was clicked. For example, if I click on “FSRS parameters” and then on “Check health when optimizing (slow)”, it redirects to this:
Is there no plan to add the “health bar” (with green, yellow, or red colors) to see how well your deck adjusts to the parameters? I enjoyed this idea, because it is a bit in the middle: I think not having the Log loss or RMSE is a bit “lost in the woods” while maybe the numbers are a bit too obtuse for most
After performing a successful review, Retrievability is displayed as very low in the Card Info box, often lower than before the review. However, in the Retrievability column of the Browser, it is displayed as 100%.
For example, before reviewing a card, Retrievability is 48% in both the Card Info box and the Browser:
Using Set Due Date on cards in filtered decks results in extremely long intervals, at least according to the Card Info box; this is not reflected in the answer buttons, which show a normal interval range.
For example, after using Set Due Date = 0 on a slightly overdue card (~1.5 months, 1-day interval), the Card Info menu shows an interval of 280 years, while the answer button shows about 5 days:
Regarding intervals after using Set Due Date, there appears to be a discrepancy between the Card Info menu and the answer buttons, even when cards are studied in normal decks. I haven’t tested this extensively, but it seems to affect overdue cards in particular.
I repeated the previous test on the same card (1-day interval before rescheduling, ~1.5 months overdue) after moving it to a normal deck. I used Set Due Date = 0. After rescheduling, the Card Info box shows an interval of 1.4 months, while the answer buttons show 4 days:
Thanks for the clarification. What’s the use case for #3? I’m not sure I understand the reasoning behind showing different interval values in the Card Info box versus above the answer buttons.
Basically, it allows accurate calculation of R in the browser.
And Anki is not showing different values for the same variable. In your example, 1.45 months is the current interval (it’s so high because the card is overdue) and 4 days is the next interval.
I see, thanks. I wasn’t aware that R is calculated differently during scheduling versus when searching/sorting the Browser.
Also, you’re right that these aren’t the same variable. I guess I’m used to SM2 and tend to expect the next interval to be equal to or greater than the previous one.
When I repeatedly click the “Update memory state and reschedule” option on the same card, it keeps alternating the calculation of the new review date between 07/18 and 07/16. Should this happen?
Shouldn’t the system choose a new date and, when clicking the same option again, maintain that date consistently, since the card should be re-identified and preserve the same memory state?
