Laboratory Experiment 01

RATE OF MEMORIZATION MODEL

ABSTRACT

Different people take different amounts of time to memorize a list. According to

the model this means that each person has his or her own personal value of k. The

primary objective of this experiment is to determine the rate of memorization of

Venus Alingod with the provided mathematical model by memorizing three different

lists in Table 1.9 from a minute-to-minute basis in 10-minute duration. The usage of

differential equation was employed to model the trend. The k-value was obtained by

a one-by-one definite integration of the fraction of the list already committed to

𝑑𝐿
memory with respect to time using the model = 𝑘(1 − 𝐿). After which, the k-values
𝑑𝑡

are then averaged to estimate the personal k-value for a certain list. The values of k

for Lists 1,2, and 3 are 0.13733, 0.31061, and 0.21609 respectively. it can be

estimated that it takes 19 and 37 minutes respectively in order for Venus Alingod to

memorize a list of 50 and 100 three-digit numbers given that the k-value used was

the mean of the k-values for three different trials which is equivalent 0.22034. The

paper contributes to the literature by documenting that subject can memorize large

number of numbers when the value of k increases.

Key words: memorization, differential equations, model

A. INTRODUCTION

Human learning is, to say the least, an extremely complicated process. The

biology and chemistry of learning is far from understood. While simple models of

learning cannot hope to encompass this complexity, they can illuminate limited

aspects of the learning process. (Blanchard, Devaney, & Hall, 2012)

Just like memorization, things learnt can also be forgotten if they are not

constantly revised. Contrary to popular belief, being smart is not synonymous to

having a good memory or good retention but lies in the lifestyle of a person, attitude,

diet and habits (Edwards, 2008). Kay, one of the best authorities on this subject, said

“Unless the mind possessed the power of treasuring up and recalling its past

experiences, no knowledge of any kind could be acquired” (Atkinson, 2009).

Effective memorization occurs when you can make an association between the new

and what you already know. As Cowan (1988) puts it, “new information must make

contact with the long-term knowledge stored in order for it to be categorically coded”

(What Good Is Learning If You Don’t Remember It?, 2007). (Dontwi, 2013)

Different people take different amounts of time to memorize a list. According to

the model this means that each person has his or her own personal value of k. The

value of k for a given individual must be determined by experiment. (Blanchard,

Devaney, & Hall, 2012)

The model is based on the assumption that the rate of learning is proportional to

the amount left to be learned. We let L(t) be the fraction of the list already committed

to memory at time t. So L=0 corresponds to knowing none of the list, and L=1

corresponds to knowing the entire list. The differential equation is

𝒅𝑳
𝒅𝒕
= 𝒌(𝟏 − 𝑳). (Blanchard, Devaney, & Hall, 2012)
Objectives

The primary objective of this experiment is to determine the rate of memorization

of Venus Alingod with the provided mathematical model. Specifically, it aims to fulfil

the following objectives:

1. To approximate the personal k-value of Venus Alingod in memorizing three

different lists (see Table 1.9 in the Appendix)

2. To compare the actual data with the predictions of the model

3. To estimate how long it would take for Venus Alingod to learn a list of 50 and

100 three-digit numbers.

Discovery Question

1. Is Venus Alingod’s personal k-value really constant, or does it improve with

practice?

2. If k does improve with practice, how would you modify the model to include

this?

B. METHODS

Experiment Overview

Four lists of three-digit numbers are given in Table 1.9. Collect the data necessary to

determine a person’s k- value (based on the model).

Use the data to approximate a personal k-value and compare the data with the

predictions of the model. Estimate how long it would take you to learn a list of 50 and

100 three-digit numbers.

Materials Needed:

1. Stopwatch
2. Table 1.9
 3. Paper
4. Pen
Procedure

1. Spend one minute studying one of the lists of numbers in Table 1.9.

2. Measure the time carefully using a stopwatch.

3. Quiz yourself on how many of the numbers you have memorized by writing

down as many of the numbers as you remember in their correct order. Put

your quiz aside to be graded later.

4. Spend another minute studying the same list.

5. Quiz yourself again.

6. Repeat the process ten times.

7. Grade your quizzes (a correct answer is having a correct number in its correct

position in the list).

8. Compile your data in a graph with t, the amount of time spent studying, on the

horizontal axis, and L, the fraction of the list learned, on the vertical axis.

9. Repeat the process on two of the other lists and compute your k-value on

these lists.
C. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Approximation of Venus Alingod’s Personal k-value and Comparison of the

Actual Data with the Predictions of the Model

To approximate the k-value using the data gathered, the computation of the k-
value utilized a one-by-one definite integration of the fraction of the list already
𝑑𝐿
committed to memory with respect to time using the model = 𝑘(1 − 𝐿). After
𝑑𝑡

which, the k-values are then averaged to estimate the personal k-value for a certain
list.

Rate of Memorization of Venus on List 1

fraction of the list already committed to

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
memory

0.5
0.4 Actual
0.3 Model
0.2
0.1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time spent in studying (in min)

Figure 1.1 Graph of the fraction of the list already committed to Venus Alingod’s
Memory on List 1 vs the time spent in studying in a 10-minute period

Time (in min) Actual Model Error %

Error
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.40 0.13 0.27 67.92
2 0.40 0.24 0.16 39.96
3 0.45 0.34 0.11 24.96
4 0.60 0.42 0.18 29.56
5 0.55 0.50 0.05 9.69
6 0.75 0.56 0.19 25.16
7 0.80 0.62 0.18 22.80
8 0.85 0.67 0.18 21.57
9 0.80 0.71 0.09 11.32
10 1.00 0.75 0.25 25.33
Table 1.1 Values of Error and Percent Errors in List 1 of the Predicted Model based
on the Actual Graph
 Figure 1.1 shows the graph of the fraction of the list already committed to

Venus Alingod’s memory in a 10-minute period (blue) and the graph based on the

predictions using the k-value obtained in the actual data to which k= 0.13733

(orange) for List 1. Meanwhile, Table 1.1 shows the values of relative error and

percent relative error of the model based on the actual data of the rate of

memorization of Alingod on List 1. The mean of the relative error is 0.1509 and its

standard deviation is 0.0777. The mean percent relative error of the model with

respect to the actual graph is equivalent to 25.2967%. A positive value of the relative

error and percent relative error means the graph of the predicted model is lower than

the graph of the actual data.

Based on the actual graph, there are times when the fraction of the list

committed to the subject’s memory shifts down due to some reasons. Although

memory is usually robust and accurate, different disease processes can disrupt

memory and cause either distortions or outright failure (Budson et al., 2001).

Forgetfulness can stem from many causes, both physical and psychological. Some

causes are reversible while others can be managed with medication (Boyd, 2012).

(Dontwi, 2013). Other reasons may include overloading of information, time

pressure, noise, and thoughts that may trigger sudden shift of emotions.
 Rate of Memorization of Venus on List 2

fraction of the list already committed to

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
memory

0.5
0.4 Actual
0.3 Model
0.2
0.1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time spent in studying (in min)

Figure 1.2 Graph of the fraction of the list already committed to Venus Alingod’s

Memory on List 2 vs the time spent in studying in a 10-minute period

Time (in Actual Model Error %

min) Error
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.35 0.27 0.08 23.71
2 0.40 0.46 -0.06 -15.68
3 0.50 0.61 -0.11 -21.23
4 0.55 0.71 -0.16 -29.33
5 0.70 0.79 -0.09 -12.63
6 0.65 0.84 -0.19 -29.98
7 0.75 0.89 -0.14 -18.17
8 0.85 0.92 -0.07 -7.84
9 0.95 0.94 0.01 1.17
10 1.00 0.96 0.04 4.48

Table 1.2 Values of Error and Percent Errors in List 2 of the Predicted Model based

on the Actual Graph

Figure 1.2 shows the graph of the fraction of the list already committed to

Venus Alingod’s memory in a 10-minute period (blue) and the graph based on the

predictions using the k-value obtained in the actual data to which k= 0.31061

(orange) for List 2. Meanwhile, Table 1.2 shows the values of relative error and
percent relative error of the model based on the actual data of the rate of

memorization of Alingod on List 2. The mean of the relative error is -0.0616 and its

standard deviation is 0.0908. The mean percent relative error of the model with

respect to the actual graph is equivalent to -9.5926%. A negative value of the relative

error and percent relative error means the graph of the predicted model is higher

than the graph of the actual data.

Notably, the k-value of the subject has increased by 0.17328 which means

that the rate of memorization of the subject also increased. It is noted from the model

that the k-value is directly proportional to the rate of memorization. This goes to

prove that a person with a high k-value constant is able to recall more than all the

others.

Rate of Memorization of Venus on List 3

fraction of the list already committed to

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
memory

0.5
0.4 Actual
0.3 Model
0.2
0.1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time spent in studying (in min)

Figure 1.3 Graph of the fraction of the list already committed to Venus Alingod’s

Memory on List 3 vs the time spent in studying in a 10-minute period.

 Time (in Actual Model Error %
min) Error
0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.40 0.19 0.21 52.02
2 0.45 0.35 0.10 22.89
3 0.50 0.47 0.03 5.53
4 0.55 0.57 -0.02 -4.29
5 0.60 0.66 -0.06 -9.24
6 0.75 0.72 0.03 3.79
7 0.80 0.77 0.03 3.13
8 0.85 0.82 0.03 3.74
9 0.90 0.85 0.05 5.21
10 1.00 0.88 0.12 11.87

Table 1.3 Values of Error and Percent Errors in List 3 of the Predicted Model based

on the Actual Graph

Figure 1.3 shows the graph of the fraction of the list already committed to

Venus Alingod’s memory in a 10-minute period (blue) and the graph based on the

predictions using the k-value obtained in the actual data to which k= 0.21309

(orange) for List 3. Meanwhile, Table 1.1 shows the values of relative error and

percent relative error of the model based on the actual data of the rate of

memorization of Alingod on List 1. The mean of the relative error is 0.0464 and its

standard deviation is 0.0701. The mean percent relative error of the model with

respect to the actual graph is equivalent to 8.6054%. A positive value of the relative

error and percent relative error means the graph of the predicted model is lower than

the graph of the actual data.

Compared to the two other trials, this trial acquired the least value of the

percent relative error and standard deviation. This states that the model is more

likely to be accepted since the error produced from the predicted model was lower

than the two trials.

 In general, to get the approximate value of Alingod’s k-value, the k-values

used in predicting different models were averaged to which the k-value yield to

0.22034, to which this will be used in the estimation of time for Alingod to learn a list

of 50 and 100 three-digit numbers. Calculating also for the relative error for this k-

value was obtained by also getting the mean of the percent relative errors from the

three trials, which is equivalent to 8.1032%. therefore the k-value was estimated to

be 0.22034 (±0.01785).

Time Estimation for Venus Alingod to Learn a List of 50 and 100 Three-digit

Numbers

Using the model, we can estimate Venus Alingod’s k-value by getting the mean

k-value for the three lists. According to the data gathered, the k-value is equivalent to

0.22034. However, to estimate the time for a subject to learn a list of 50 and 100
𝑑𝐿
three-digit numbers, the model will be modified in such a way that = 𝑘(50 − 𝐿) and
𝑑𝑡

𝑑𝐿 𝑘
= 2 (50 − 𝐿) respectively, wherein L(t) is the number of the three-digit numbers
𝑑𝑡

that has been committed to memory in the correct order at time t. At time t=0, we

consider that L=0. We take into consideration in the model for the time determination

of a list of 100-three digit numbers the concept of proportion to which we let 100 be

50, and that’s why the modification of the model utilized a k/2 constant since L has

been also halved. We assume that the time in memorizing a list of 100 three-digit

numbers is the same as twice the time of memorizing a list of 50-three digit numbers.

(Note: The upper limit for the left side part integration will only utilize the highest

possible integer, which is 49, to generate an approximation of the time. In order to

completely memorize a full list of 50 and 100 three-digit numbers respectively, an

additional 1 minute will be added to the total time.)

 𝑑𝐿 𝑑𝐿 𝑘
= 𝑘(50 − 𝐿) = (50 − 𝐿)
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡 2

𝑑𝐿
= 𝑘𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝐿
(50 − 𝐿) = 2𝑘𝑑𝑡
(50 − 𝐿)
49 𝑡
𝑑𝐿
∫ = 𝑘 ∫ 𝑑𝑡 49
𝑑𝐿 𝑡
(50 − 𝐿)
0 0 ∫ = 2𝑘 ∫ 𝑑𝑡
0 (50 − 𝐿) 0
−ln(50 − 𝐿)] 490 = 𝑘𝑡] 0𝑡
−ln(50 − 𝐿)] 490 = 2𝑘𝑡] 0𝑡
ln(50) = 𝑘𝑡
ln(50) = 2𝑘𝑡
ln(50)
t= ≈ 17.75 ≈ 18 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠 ln(50)
𝑘 t= ≈ 35.51 ≈ 36 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠
2𝑘
𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 ≈ 19 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠
𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 ≈ 37 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑢𝑡𝑒𝑠

Based on the calculations above, it can be estimated that it takes 19 and 37

minutes respectively in order for Venus Alingod to memorize a list of 50 and 100

three-digit numbers.

D. CONCLUSION

This study employed the usage of differential equations to model the rate at which

the subject (Venus Alingod) could memorize three different lists as stated in Table

1.9 in a minute-per-minute basis within 10-minute duration. The model brought in its

wake the fact that the higher the k-value calculated, the person will most likely able

to absorb and retain more compared to a lower k-value. Moreover, as the k-value

increases, the rate of memorization increases and the time for the subject to learn a

certain list decreases relatively. Based on the trials made, the k-value of the subject

varies from time-to-time and does improve with practice. It can be inferred from the

data above that the shift of the k-values from 0.13733 to 0.31061 to 0.21309 is said

to be not constant since there are factors affecting the shift such as information

overloading, time pressure, thoughts that may trigger sudden emotions, noise, etc.
The study utilized only numerical approximations to obtain the value of the subject’s

k. However, if the value of k increases or improves with practice, modifications can

such be made in such ways that more trials are needed to obtain the nearest

approximation of k, and as well as a regular monitoring from a time-to-time basis can

be made.

E. REFERENCES

Blanchard, P., Devaney, R. L., & Hall, G. R. (2012). Differential Equations, Fourth
Edition. Boston: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
Dontwi, I. &.-D.-M.-M. (2013, 2013). Modeling Memorization and Forgetfulness Using
Differential Equations. Progress in Applied Mathematics.
F. APPENDIX