The Method of Loci: Build Your Memory Palace
fs.blog
fs.blog
Bower (1972), for example, showed that short-term associative memory could be dramatically improved by imagining a unique scene involving the two items to be associated [1]. E.g. to remember DOG-BICYCLE (so that when you hear DOG you recall BICYCLE or vice versa) you imagine a dog riding a bicycle, or in this article to remember STEAK-PORCH you imagine a cow sitting on your porch. Since these will be very unique to each pair, you won't accidentally end up associating STEAK-BICYCLE or DOG-PORCH during recall.
In this light, the utility of the "palace" is simply that it's an extremely familiar ordered sequence or layout of items (e.g. PORCH, STAIRS, KITCHEN, BEDROOM, etc), not that it is fundamentally a 2D/3D spatial structure. In CS lingo, this sequence/layout would act as a fixed, ordered set of "keys" for recalling key-value pairs that you stored via the imagery process. For instance, if one used another familiar sequence, say the first scenes of your favorite movie you've seen a hundred times, you could creatively put the items in your grocery list into those scenes and then recall them by recalling the scenes in order and remembering what grocery item you put in each one.
Thus, I think there's a sense in which it's not 2D/3D space that's fundamental to better recall, but rather a familiar topologically organized layout of items/locations/scenes that you can use as the keys to bind new items to in the short-term via visualization.
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232506583_Mental_im...
The advantage it has compared with a "link system" [2] is that forgetting one link doesn't mean you lose the rest of the chain. You can also jump to an arbitrary point in your palace.
You're right in saying the use of a physical location is just a convenient but not fundamental part of such a system.
A system that really pushes the idea that the pegs you attach things to can be arbitrary is SemCubed [3], a system where you create a large 2-dimensional grid of "pegs". It also makes use of the Mnemonic Major System that I'm a big fan of.
[1] https://www.ludism.org/mentat/PegSystem [2] https://www.ludism.org/mentat/LinkSystem [3] https://www.ludism.org/mentat/SemCubed
I also figured that the memory palace concept was sort of like an ordered JSON object, so any memorized sequence should theoretically work. I’m now imagining some tool that lets me load up one of my favorite movies, but then also let’s me drop iOS or Snapchat-style stickers on any range of frames. So maybe I need to remember some recipe… At 01:00 I can place a sticker of an image of vegetable oil, then 01:05 is a salt shaker, then 01:10 is some eggs, then at 01:15 is a photo of the finished product. These stickers would be overlaid on the film conspicuously, maybe on top of character’s heads haha
This also brings to mind the possibility of making my entire world a memory palace if I had the above capability in a set of AR glasses. Notes/to-dos/whatevers could be placed and anchored to different places in my home, workplace, neighborhood, etc. They might eventually become interweaved into my mental representation of that location, so that a specific anchored item always springs to mind when I look at my coffee table, for example, whether I have the AR glasses on or not.
In CS terms, a memory palace is usually used as a linked list while a peg system would be a hash-table but you can turn the memory palace into an array with both O(1) random access and fast in-order iteration.
Not all of us are "jealous" of course, but a memory palace seems like an incredibly useful technique if you can master it. I wind up just taking a lot of notes and relying on a Reminders app.
It does not feel the same as normal "seeing", so if I were asked that question I would probably say I still see a black wall.
Due to the confusion of language as well as the testimonies of some rare people with incredibly vivid mental images that are on par with actual physical sight, I thought I might have aphantasia for a period of time, but after reading up on it, I feel like aphantasia is a much stronger condition than most people on the internet think it is. "Just seeing black" when you try to visualize something isn't enough - it seems like that's just a sign of being a person with a fairly typical brain who's using the word "see" in its literal sense.
For example, in the star test (https://www.reddit.com/r/Aphantasia/comments/aioyga/simple_a...), if I was a person who understood "see" in the first sense, I'd say that I was a 1. If I instead switch to using the second sense of the word, I'd easily be a 6.
It feels like any test that asks you to rate the vividness of the item you "see" in your mind's eye will fall prey to this problem. I saw a comment on HN where the commenter suggested asking someone to visualize an elephant in profile, and then ask them which way the trunk is facing to see if they're aphantasic or not. I'd also suggest that if you ever imagined a person running beside your car while you were taking a road trip as a child, you also probably don't have aphantasia.
Apparently so. That's how my wife describes it. She scores an easy 6 on the "star test" - https://www.reddit.com/r/Aphantasia/comments/aioyga/simple_a.... Myself, I normally score 2-3 on it.
> Close your eyes and imagine a red star. Which image do you see? I see 2, but most people see 5 or 6.
It seems some people are (a) reporting what they actually see with their eyes closed, i.e. mostly nothing, a 1. Others are (b) imagining a star and reporting what that looks like in their mind's eye.
I didn't think that aphantasia meant the (a)-type literal seeing, so I just read up on it again, and the descriptions seem to refer to (b)-type imagining/visualization, like imagining a giraffe then being able to describe what you see in your imagination. It doesn't mean you can actually see it, with open or closed eyes.
It seems this test convinced a lot of people they have aphantasia, as it seems most people are a 1. And I suspect most of those who say 6 are talking about what they imagine, not what they physically see. I'm a 1 in sense (a), but in sense (b) a 6, well, I can imagine any kind of red star, like most people, I believe.
I am 2-3 on (a) and (b). My wife is 6 on (a) and (b). She reports that she does actually see stuff as if it was there. Conversely, I only barely see the things, and at the same time, I can barely "imagine" them in the sense of (b). E.g. my process of "imagining a star and reporting what that looks like" consists of keeping the words, the tokens "red star", repeated by my inner voice on a loop, and then exploring the graph of associations. It's a non-visual process. I don't "see" it, but I can tell you all about it because I know how stars look like and what properties they have.
What I find interesting is that every single one of us is somewhere on that scale, and we don't quite understand the perspective of someone who is on a different place on the scale. Your own question highlights that ("Is it actually possible to see anything else?").
We are all trained from birth to deal with our senses and mental capabilities as they come, barring an injury. What each of us perceives is the de-facto normal. Learning that others don't have senses just like ours is something of an eye-opener.
If so, you're imaging the sense of sound. Visualization is just doing the same thing with sight. You can still tell that "internal sight" is different from real "external" sight.
Also I believe visualization is a skill that can be improved with practice. It's just a form of 2D working memory and it's known that working memory can be improved with practice.
I expect if you practiced that frequently, and gradually (over days or weeks) tried to add more details or colors etc you would find it improves over time.
But whether that's actually a worthwhile investment of time is another question :-)
I have tried to use memory palaces. The result is that now I have to remember two things rather than one (the memory palace location and the thing I'm trying to remember).
To be fair, I also seem to have Severely Deficient Autobiographical Memory (SDAM) and that will impact personal memory recovery quite a bit. SDAM is common in conjunction with Aphantasia, and perhaps the two combined are conspiring against me in this instance.
a = 1, b = 2, c = 3, ..., j = 10, k = 20, l = 30, ..., t = 100, u = 200, ...
There is no value in the position (like with Roman numbers where a smaller value after a bigger value subtracts it). So "cab" is 6, but "abba" is also 6. Now you can make words and rhymes to remember numbers. Saves you all the mental images of Sinatra kicking superman :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mnemonic_major_system?wprov=sf...
------
Went digging through my old files, turns out this was almost 10 years ago!.. and looks like I left it unfinished.
I was using nltk to convert cmudict words into MM sequences using phenomes.
Then I was basically brute forcing all the different ways you could slice the given sequences into sub sequences. Then the idea would be to try and identify the "best" sequence.
You'd want to restrict it to using relatively common words, preferably nouns. Really you'd want to avoid any words that are ambiguous or could be easily confused.
Even better would be able to find grammatically correct sentences that fit the sequence.. but I think it's unlikely you'd have any hits.
Anyway.. this is the broken/unfinished code I found in the depths of my hard-drive: https://github.com/johtso/mnemonic_major
Want to remember something when you get home? Come up with a few words or some such concise thought that will remind you, then picture your front door - just as you'll see it when you do get home - and think those words or that thought. Repeat it to yourself while you imagine unlocking the door or whatever. Do that a few times - it only takes a moment - then forget about it and go back to what you were doing. When you get home, the association thus formed will trigger and remind you.
It only takes a moment, and I find that even with very little practice it works quite well. The method generalizes, too. It doesn't seem affected by aphantasia; I don't really find myself able to form vivid mental images and the "Ganzflicker" thing from the other day had no effect on me past a mild headache, but this technique works fine. Maybe it helps that the visual component is based on experiential memory, but whatever the reason, it works well enough even for me that I can comfortably recommend it.
For the same reason, I wouldn't expect this kind of - I dunno, "mnestic nudge?" - to last very reliably over significant spans of time. I can do it over spans of a few hours to a morning-and-afternoon day, but I don't recall having tried it overnight and I wouldn't want to rely solely on it if I did. I don't really know whether or how well it parallelizes, either; if I've tried that before now, I no longer recall how it went.
What I'm describing really isn't like a "memory palace" at all, even if I mentioned it in a thread about those. That concept claims quite a general and systematic sort of utility, while this is just one among a set of tools that for me also includes a pocket notebook, phone reminders, a diary, and so on. When circumstances preclude immediate access to any of the others, I use this one instead, and also by choice because without at least a bit of practice it might not work when I do need it. (Also because it's really convenient, with less friction even than pen and paper - and besides, my phone can't "remind me of something the next time I pick up my diary".)
Interestingly enough, he went on to co-found Atlas Obscura (https://www.atlasobscura.com/users/josh)
spatial memory is an underappreciated mechanism of our brains, and was one of the founding concepts of MacOS (that you could spatially remember where files are)
For me it’s about positioning data in a visually unique space, so when I’m browsing my file system trying to remember where I saved something, I’ll have the visual cues of form and pattern to help.
I don’t have an updated preview but I describe my reasoning more in a blog with screenshots of a year old 2D prototype.
I’d be very curious to know where your project is at, eventually I’m going to have to port this to Unity so it works outside of web browsers, but I really want to keep the cross-device compatibility, so I’m working on a data storage layer that can serve both (you guessed it, everything is in JSON)
That's awesome! VR has lots of potential but i'm not (and it's not) there yet. Your project sounds really novel. I've equated mine to a 3D database because you can do inner/outer joins, search, filter, and materialize "views" in 3D space.
I'm nearing a demo stage, been at this for a few years - but wow will i need to revisit my code before I expand on future development - it's a lot of code to sling and compared to my day job doing web dev in MVC, leaves a lot to be desired architecturally.
Great job on blogging about your project - i need to get better about that.
Additionally, I think having this sharable and on the web opens a lot of possibilities. I hope you keep working on it.
But man, that color change on your blog really messed with me. I have F.lux installed which adds warmth to whites to help with getting to sleep at night or as daylight changes and your site is like a rapid version of that. I'd prefer either not that at all, or at least scroll position based.
At present, she is cataloging her thousands of photos, including writing captions. Occasionally, she grumbles because she can't remember the name of some out-of-the-way location in France or the name of some obscure scholar in Turkmenistan. Me, I'm happy if I can remember to get out of bed in the morning.
She said that when she was child she thought that everyone just saw numbers and letters in color. She didn't realize till about 20 years ago that she had the gift of synesthesia. I think her father and her uncle probably also had synesthesia. Both had great recall. Her uncle was famous for knowing the names and relationships of thousands of people in his district.
Mindfulness meditation most likely would be your best bet for improving short term memory, permanently: https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/can_mindfulnes...
the most effective way i've found to learn and remember is:
1. flashcards with spaced repetition (like anki, etc.) 2. then teaching it to someone (or pretend like you're teaching a class)/implementing it in code 3. solve a challenging problem. this could be trying the harder problems in the textbook and asking for help from the professor or exploring using it in novel ways.
I’m convinced I could memorize thousands of digits with a little more effort. The only technique I used was remembering chunks of numbers of varying length. The memory palace method sounds difficult to me.
I got 84% but had made up —-wild— stories about each photo in order to remember it 2 days later