Also, can you make the x axis in dates? Like, November 2024.
As a sidenote / question: Is there a reason why the graphes in anki have no x and y axis titles? Normally in maths and sciences youâre required to add those so that itâs obvious what the graph is showing.
E.g.
Here the x axis would be something like date or x days ago and the y axis something like amount of cards. The old graphs apparently had that, see the picture called old here.
I assume itâs just a stylistic choice, since all of that units information is captured (and with specificity) in the hover/tap pop-up. It might seem unusual from a math/science perspective â but from a data-presentation perspective, I donât mind that it gives the graph a chance to stand alone as a visual.
I guess that makes sense.
Iâd still prefer the âscientific wayâ since it allows me to see all the important information at a glance without having to hover over every graph. And while I personally can deduce the meaning of the axis most of the time, I donât think itâs that obvious for everyone.
But thatâs a discussion for another topic. Iâll open one in the near future if there isnât already one.
I guess part of it might be the requirement that they work well on small screens.
On a mobile phone the axis labels may eat a significant amount of the available space.
If that is the issue you could make them responsive so the labels only show when you have plenty of screen space.
Yup, we already have text overflow issues in this screen and in the simulator too where we have a label for y-axis.
It actually looks better without the labels according to me.
Oops. I find a bug when I analyze this problem⌠We forgot to update memorized_cnt_per_day when learning new cards in the last refactor.
Edit: Yep, this problem does exist because we only update the memorized_cnt_per_day when the card is reviewed in the simulator. I will submit a PR to improve it.
PR:
Can you rename âcountâ to âreviewsâ? The y-axis title in the image is also âmemorised countâ which makes it a bit confusing because itâs not clear what âcountâ is.
And if youâre willing to make some other UI changes, the radio buttons and the âSimulateâ/âClear last simulationâ should have some gap between them.
I invited you to join OSR, and I hope you can help me review the code.
Well, now I want a native âEstimated total knowledge over timeâ (historical, not simulated) even more ![]()
Note the difference between the end value and âEstimated total knowledgeâ
I have spent longer than I probably should have trying to get this to work.
Does it matter that thereâs a discrepancy between SSE and native Anki?
Hereâs the code in case someone wants to check if Iâve done something stupid. (I get the feeling its something to do with manual reviews)
The tests pass at least?!?
My real question is,
is this worth including in SSE in what appears to me to be a somewhat broken state? Or should I skip it, release the other graphs/features I did ages ago, and include it when its completely correct?
Maybe I should even ditch it as an SSE graph and try to put it in native Anki like I probably should have from the start.
Itâs good enough to ship! I will check the code later.
Well, my original idea was having an estimated total knowledge graph in Anki itself.
Btw, why candlestick charts? I think they are hard to read for most people (aside from people who are into trading/investing, lol). A curve is preferable, like in the SuperMemo image that I posted at the very beginning.
Why not a curve?
Btw, it would be neat to have Last week/Last month/Last year/All time
Also, nitpick: round the numbers. It doesnât make much sense to display non-integer numbers, since this is supposed to be interpreted as âthe number of cardsâ.
![]()
Curve would probably be better but it would be different from the rest of the addon and take time to implement.
Oh and you can get the âlast weekâ and such if you scroll the graph though it might be annoying.
Yeah I should round the number really but I feel like that would be hard to explain why the graph would go down as the number stays the same.
Instead I opted to try and explain what the graph actually represents. Probably poorly but oh well.











