Understanding the Role of Rehearsal Scale in Continual Learning under Varying Model Capacities
Authors: JinLi He, Liang Bai, Xian Yang
Organizations: Institute of Intelligent Information Processing, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, 030006, China · Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
Rehearsal is one of the key techniques for mitigating catastrophic forgetting and has been widely adopted in continual learning algorithms due to its simplicity and practicality. However, the theoretical understanding of how rehearsal scale influences learning dynamics remains limited. To address this gap, we formulate rehearsal-based continual learning as a multidimensional effectiveness-driven iterative optimization problem, providing a unified characterization across diverse performance metrics. Within this framework, we derive a closed-form analysis of adaptability, memorability, and generalization from the perspective of rehearsal scale. Our results uncover several intriguing and counterintuitive findings. First, rehearsal can impair model's adaptability, in sharp contrast to its traditionally recognized benefits. Second, increasing the rehearsal scale does not necessarily improve memory retention. When tasks are similar and noise levels are low, the memory error exhibits a diminishing lower bound. Finally, we validate these insights through numerical simulations and extended analyses on deep neural networks across multiple real-world datasets, revealing statistical patterns of rehearsal mechanisms in continual learning.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : An ideal continual learning system should strike a delicate balance among the adaptation of newly acquired knowledge, the memorization of previously learned knowledge, and the generalization of unseen data distributions across diverse scenarios.
Fig. 2 : Adaptation error of rehearsal-based methods under different setups, where T=8 , n=1000 and ∥wt∗∥2=1 for all t∈T . Subfigure settings: (a) s=500 ; (b) σ=0.02 ; (c) s=500 , σ=0.02 . Discrete points denote averages across runs.
Fig. 3 : Memory error of rehearsal-based methods under different setups, where T=8 , n=1000 and ∥wt∗∥2=1 for all t∈T . Subfigure settings: (a) s=500 ; (b) σ=0.02 ; (c) s=500 , σ=0.02 . Discrete points denote averages over simulation runs.
Fig. 4 : Generalization error w.r.t. the number of model parameters or rehearsal samples, with T=8 , n=1000 and ∥wt∗∥2=1 . Subfigure settings: (a) s=500 ; (b) σ=0.02 ; (c) s=500 , σ=0.02 . Discrete points denote averages across runs.
Num of Tasks
T3
T6
T9
T12
T16
T18
T20
0%
1.12±0.03
0.96±0.03
1.17±0.02
0.89±0.02
0.99±0.02
1.04±0.01
1.01±0.01
5%
1.18±0.02
1.02±0.03
1.20±0.03
0.91±0.02
1.03±0.00
1.08±0.01
1.05±0.02
10%
1.26±0.04
1.06±0.02
1.27±0.04
0.94±0.02
1.10±0.02
1.13±0.02
1.12±0.01
50%
1.45±0.03
1.22±0.05
1.42±0.08
1.09±0.07
1.21±0.04
1.31±0.11
1.27±0.02
TABLE I : The adaptation errors on the Tiny-ImageNet dataset across 20 training tasks with varying buffer sizes.
Fig. 5 : Adaptation error on Tiny-ImageNet with increasing training classes, with the legend showing varying buffer sizes.
Fig. 6 : Impact of rehearsal size on adaptation, memory, and generalization errors in deep neural networks trained on MNIST, CIFAR-10, and CIFAR-100. Subfigures (a)-(b) show how accumulated classes affect adaptation error under different buffer sizes; (c)-(d) illustrate the impact of inter-task relatedness on generalization; (e)-(f) show how rehearsal size influences memory error under varying similarity levels.
Training Classes
2
4
6
8
10
Average Adaptation Error
0.127 ± 0.004
0.398 ± 0.003
0.279 ± 0.001
0.105 ± 0.003
0.159 ± 0.002
Average Memory Error
–
1.544 ± 0.031
3.896 ± 0.054
4.238 ± 0.163
4.655 ± 0.065
Average Generalization Error
0.127 ± 0.004
1.035 ± 0.013
2.865 ± 0.038
3.406 ± 0.121
3.938 ± 0.053
Forgetting Ratio
–
7.300 ± 0.628
22.350 ± 0.536
27.233 ± 0.427
38.375 ± 0.135
Average Accuracy
95.050 ± 0.260
65.775 ± 0.335
39.200 ± 0.414
35.775 ± 0.179
32.060 ± 0.334
TABLE II : Comparison of three types of model errors with traditional metrics as training classes increase on CIFAR-10.
Methods
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
EWC
86.20
84.60
83.17
81.91
80.11
LwF
73.35
73.86
72.92
73.90
74.76
iCaRL
84.59
82.98
81.59
80.89
80.19
DER
73.87
73.57
72.40
72.86
72.40
FOSTER
79.48
84.71
84.35
83.95
83.10
MEMO
68.10
66.78
66.01
65.56
65.16
TABLE III : Comparison of current accuracy across continual learning benchmarks as rehearsal increases on CIFAR-100.
Fig. 7 : The memory error as rehearsal size increases across different levels of classes interrelation on Tiny-ImageNet.
TABLE IV : The average error comparing different sampling strategies and deeper network architectures on CIFAR-10.
Continual learning must absorb new tasks without erasing old ones, and replay---mixing a small buffer of past examples into current training---is among the most effective remedies for catastrophic forgetting. Yet its generalization behavior is shaped by two coupled effects that existing analyses fold into a single hypothesis-level quantity: finite memory replaces each past distribution with an empirical proxy, and repeated reuse couples the buffer, the current data, and the final hypothesis through a shared optimization trajectory. We develop a layer-wise information-theoretic framework that separates these effects at every depth. Our main result decomposes the expected generalization gap into a replay-induced representation drift and an optimization-dependence term, the latter further resolved into stability, plasticity, interaction, and residual-coupling components. Two refinements make the framework operational. A Wasserstein relaxation of the drift term, valid under support mismatch, yields a depth-dependent drift--sensitivity trade-off whose minimizer identifies which interior layer to stabilize. An SGLD instantiation of the optimization term reduces it to a trajectory-level log-determinant budget, exposing a curvature-aware gradient-alignment statistic that serves as an online diagnostic of task-wise forgetting. Controlled and benchmark experiments confirm the predicted memory scaling, the interior funnel, and the alignment signal's link to forgetting.
Tieliang Gong, Zhongbo Zhang, Wen Wen +1
Tieliang Gong, Zhongbo Zhang and Wen Wen are with the School of Computer Science and Technology, Xi’an Jiaotong University, China · Yong-Jin Liu is with Department of Computer Science and Technology, Tsinghua University, China
The magnitude of parameter updates are considered a key factor in continual learning. However, most existing studies focus on designing diverse update strategies, while a theoretical understanding of the underlying mechanisms remains limited. Therefore, we characterize model's forgetting from the perspective of parameter update magnitude and formalize it as knowledge degradation induced by task-specific drift in the parameter space, which has not been fully captured in previous studies due to their assumption of a unified parameter space. By deriving the optimal parameter update magnitude that minimizes forgetting, we unify two representative update paradigms, frozen training and initialized training, within an optimization framework for constrained parameter updates. Our theoretical results further reveals that sequence tasks with small parameter distances exhibit better generalization and less forgetting under frozen training rather than initialized training. These theoretical insights inspire a novel hybrid parameter update strategy that adaptively adjusts update magnitude based on gradient directions. Experiments on deep neural networks demonstrate that this hybrid approach outperforms standard training strategies, providing new theoretical perspectives and practical inspiration for designing efficient and scalable continual learning algorithms.
JinLi He, Liang Bai, Xian Yang
Institute of Intelligent Information Processing, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, 030006, China · Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
Continued pretraining enables language models to adapt to new domains and knowledge, but often at the cost of forgetting previously acquired capabilities. Replay can mitigate this trade-off, but fixed replay mixtures allocate training independently of the model's actual retention needs. We introduce Replay on Demand (RoD), which instead derives the replay allocation from the model's learning dynamics. RoD jointly prioritizes adaptation samples by their remaining learning potential and replay samples by their observed forgetting. Their competition for a shared training budget yields an online curriculum that determines what to train on at each step. Across models, scales, and adaptation domains, RoD reaches or improves upon the adaptation-forgetting frontier of tuned fixed-replay baselines and model merging without prescribing a replay allocation in advance. Replay concentrates on sources that are more vulnerable to forgetting and dynamically increases and redistributes as forgetting emerges during training. Together, our results show that replay can be allocated online from the model's evolving state, targeting what is needed, when it is needed.
Lukas Thede, Shengzhuang Chen, Stefan Winzeck +3
University of Tübingen, Tübingen AI Center · Helmholtz Munich · Munich Center for Machine Learning (MCML) +3