Review Learns What Matters
Arivu's Review loop now explains why items return and uses recall feedback to keep resurfacing useful, not noisy.
Resurfacing is only useful when it respects your attention.
An old saved link can be a gift. It can also be noise. The difference is context: why is this here, why now, and what should happen if it was not useful?
That is why Review now has a clearer feedback loop.
Review Has Reasons
When an item appears in Review, it should not feel random. It can return because it is:
- due from a reminder
- attached to a stale task
- marked important
- carrying a next action
- older and unreviewed
- part of the resurfacing signal
- a note or source that started work but never finished
The reason appears with the item, so you know what kind of attention it is asking for.
Feedback Tunes the Loop
Review now gives you more than complete or snooze. It lets you teach the loop:
- Useful means this was worth seeing.
- Not useful means the prompt missed.
- Snooze longer means it matters, but not soon.
- Never resurface means keep it searchable, but stop bringing it back.
This is a small set of choices on purpose. Review should not become another configuration screen. It should learn from simple judgments you can make quickly.
Beyond Spaced Repetition
The first version of Arivu’s rediscovery story leaned on Memory Jogger and spaced-repetition language. That was useful, but too narrow.
Most saved research is not a flashcard. A source may come back because it is tied to a decision, a task, a reminder, a priority, or an unfinished note. Time matters, but it is not the only signal.
Review treats resurfacing as part of a workflow, not a memory game.
What this means for you: The app can bring things back because they are actionable, not only because enough days have passed.
Keeping Searchable Does Not Mean Keep Surfacing
Never resurface is important because archives should stay complete without becoming noisy.
Sometimes a source should remain searchable for reference, but it should not interrupt you again. That distinction matters. Deleting is too blunt. Archiving is not always enough. Review needs a way to stop prompting while preserving the record.
The Goal
The goal is not perfect prediction. The goal is a calmer loop:
- Arivu brings back a plausible item.
- It explains why.
- You act, snooze, or give feedback.
- The next Review gets a little better.
That is how saved research becomes a living system without turning into another feed.