You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

JGWeissman comments on Group rationality diary, 8/20/12 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: cata 21 August 2012 09:42AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (66)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: JGWeissman 22 August 2012 01:39:02AM 1 point [-]

I think they are likely to take your advice, and I would encourage them to do so.

I myself plan to adapt to polyphasic starting September 7th, and would interested in any tests you think I should do.

Comment author: gwern 22 August 2012 02:13:49AM *  1 point [-]

would interested in any tests you think I should do.

Having tried to do polyphasic myself twice, and having read a good deal of material from other people, I really would not suggest many tests for 2 reasons:

  1. as far as I know, there are ~0 extant records of either long-term spaced repetition users or Zeo users. The latter is particularly striking since multiple Zeo users were supposedly doing polyphasic (see the Zeo blog & forum). Any dataset is good, so there is no point risking someone returning no useful results by demanding they maintain 3 or 4 separate metrics - as valuable as they all might be.
  2. Keeping up unautomated metrics like spaced repetition is particularly risky for polyphasic sleepers, since willpower & energy are precisely what is most lacking in the transition phase. Something dropped in the transition phase may never be resumed.

So, that's my basic suggestion. Pick 1 metric, at most, which requires effort on your part.

Zeos require little-to-no effort, so you can add on 1 metric. My suggestion is spaced repetition (Wozniak would also thank you for data), but also valid would be something like dual n-back (DNB) or the Psychomotor vigilance task (PVT).