<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Metacognition on Seunghoon Choi</title><link>https://seunghoonchoi.com/tags/metacognition/</link><description>Recent content in Metacognition on Seunghoon Choi</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://seunghoonchoi.com/tags/metacognition/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>A New Field Is Not Learned by Seeing More, but by Seeing Differently: 3, 7, 30, 100</title><link>https://seunghoonchoi.com/column/learning-magic-numbers/</link><pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://seunghoonchoi.com/column/learning-magic-numbers/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src="https://seunghoonchoi.com/images/col-learning-magic-numbers.jpg" alt="A person standing at a city intersection at dusk, looking at three roads"&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class="inline-image-caption"&gt;A sense of a new field comes not just from the quantity of examples, but from comparing the differences between different examples.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When people first learn a new field, they often ask, &amp;ldquo;How many examples do I need before I get a feel for it?&amp;rdquo; It seems like seeing more should solve it, but that is not how it works. You can look at a hundred examples of the same kind and your thoughts can still stay unorganized.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>