Across classrooms around the world, the same pattern recurs: students work hard, revise consistently, and still forget most of what they reviewed a week later. The problem was never effort or ability, it was the method.
Nothing about the way these students were being asked to revise was aligned with how memory actually works. The science of spacing, retrieval, and forgetting curves has existed for over a hundred years. It had simply never reached the classrooms where the need was most acute.
So I built Cognivia. It is not a quiz app or a learning platform; it is an instrument that models how each brain forgets and steps in at precisely the right moment, whether that person is in a rural school in India, a library in Lagos, or a bedroom in São Paulo. It runs on a single shared device, with nothing to install, because the classrooms that need it most cannot depend on heavy infrastructure.
I locked the study design before collecting any data, and I report the analysis as it comes, including the results that contradict what I predicted. A null finding gets published with the same weight as a positive one. I would rather know the truth than protect the idea.
I did not start this to launch a product. I started it because a question would not leave me alone, and I built it where that question is hardest to answer. If it works, there is plenty to build on top of it, but the science has to come first, or none of the rest is worth trusting.
Manik Maurya
The shortest version
The world teaches roughly 1.5 billion students in school every year. A tiny fraction of them are reached by anything resembling adaptive instruction. The classroom is not going to be rebuilt around each individual learner, not in any country, not in any decade I will be alive for. What can be rebuilt is the few minutes of revision each of those learners does on their own.
So this study asks a narrow question, does adapting the schedule to the type of error a learner makes improve retention?, because if the answer is yes, the answer is portable. It runs on a phone or a shared classroom computer, and needs no teacher to install it and no school to approve it. It is, in the most literal sense, the only intervention I know how to build alone, from Kanpur, that could matter to a learner I will never meet.
This trial tests one falsifiable claim, that adapting to the type of error beats plain spacing. I report the result either way, with the data and protocol public. A null would mean that specific claim was wrong, not that the work ends, because the measurement layer beneath the scheduling, the Genome and the Passport, is useful as a diagnostic on its own, whatever the scheduling result.