The Bayesian Approach to Continual Learning: An Overview

Classical continual learning (CL) has primarily focused on enabling models to update and retain knowledge through parameter-centric mechanisms, e.g., training strategies, architectural designs, and weight adaptation. However, emerging paradigms are reshaping the scope of CL beyond this traditional model adaptation view. For instance, on-policy learning broadens the space of update mechanisms; test-time training extends CL from the training phase to inference; and external harness components such as memory, skill libraries, and interaction protocols extend the evolutionary boundaries of model capabilities far beyond the static parameter space. Collectively, these developments indicate a transition from parameter-centric learning toward system-level adaptation. To characterize this transition, we examine the evolution of continual learning through three dimensions: When, How, and Where learning occurs. The How dimension encompasses off-policy, on-policy, and beyond-gradient optimization mechanics. The When dimension captures evolution across pre-training, post-training, and inference-time stages. The Where dimension delineates updates occurring within internal parameters versus external structural constraints. Anchored by this tri-axial framework, we systematically survey representative methods, trace the ongoing transition of continual learning, and discuss the key challenges, broader implications, and future directions arising from this paradigm shift.

As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly capable, the next question is how can we enable models to continually learn? Today, the field largely frames this as a problem of context management and mitigating forgetting. We argue this framing is incomplete: continual learning is fundamentally about increasing model competence as the world changes. We disentangle this change along two axes -- space, where the model encounters new domains, and time, where the underlying data drifts under a fixed task. This framing lets us study continual learning under realistic conditions: new domains arrive over time, facts drift past their training cutoff, and agentic interactions accumulate state across episodes. To evaluate methods under this setting, we recast widely used LLM benchmarks as sequential problems and introduce a single mechanism-agnostic protocol that compares prompt-based methods (GEPA, ACE), supervised learning (SFT, SDFT), reinforcement learning (GRPO, SDPO), and context compression (Cartridges, In-place TTT). Prompt-based methods fit each new stage quickly but degrade on future tasks. Distillation-based methods accumulate knowledge stably but struggle to update outdated facts. Context compression improves efficiency without substantially improving the ability to learn new tasks. Online reinforcement learning adapts most effectively to knowledge updates but remains sensitive to noisy reward signals. Overall, our results suggest that continual learning is not a single capability: different patterns of environmental change require fundamentally different update behaviors, determining when adaptation must be learned inside model weights and when it can be achieved through external scaffolding. We hope that understanding where each method succeeds and fails will guide the design of stronger continual learning systems.

The Continual Learning (CL) literature has long been driven by the goal of mitigating catastrophic forgetting. This objective rests on a pervasive, often unstated assumption: that a lifelong learner should approximate the Joint-Task Learning (JTL) solution and retain all previously acquired knowledge. We challenge this retention-centered premise, arguing that in non-stationary environments prioritizing retention can impede real-time adaptation. Shifting the focus to the Average Lifelong Error (ALE), we formalize CL as an online optimization problem governed by the interaction between environmental and learning dynamics. We introduce Transfer Efficiency as a quantitative measure of the tension between Instability, the bias inherited from conflicting past experience, and Transient Error, the optimization cost of learning new tasks from scratch. Under mild convergence conditions, holding across linear and neural network models, this decomposition yields a Critical Task Duration: a closed-form threshold beyond which historical knowledge transitions from a warm-start advantage to an optimization liability whenever retention induces a positive stationary bias. We validate these theoretical predictions on continual image classification and reinforcement learning benchmarks. Finally, by connecting continual learning to the online learning framework of predictable sequences, we show that JTL is only one instance of a broader family of objectives, and we propose a new general class of continual learning algorithms, which we call Predictive Continual Learning. Predictive CL algorithms optimize expected future performance under an explicit, dynamically updated model of future tasks. As a proof of concept, we analyze a Window algorithm that interpolates between JTL and Independent-Task Learning (ITL), outperforming both under controlled distributional drift.