Temporal Taskification in Streaming Continual Learning: A Source of Evaluation Instability

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.

Continual learning (CL) studies how models acquire tasks sequentially while retaining previously learned knowledge. Despite substantial progress in benchmarking CL methods, comparative evaluations typically keep the fine-tuning regime fixed. In this paper, we argue that the fine-tuning regime, defined by the trainable parameter subspace, is itself a key evaluation variable. We formalize adaptation regimes as projected optimization over fixed trainable subspaces, showing that changing the trainable depth alters the effective update signal through which both current task fitting and knowledge preservation operate. This analysis motivates the hypothesis that method comparisons need not be invariant across regimes. We test this hypothesis in task incremental CL, five trainable depth regimes, and four standard methods: online EWC, LwF, SI, and GEM. Across five benchmark datasets, namely MNIST, Fashion MNIST, KMNIST, QMNIST, and CIFAR-100, and across 11 task orders per dataset, we find that the relative ranking of methods is not consistently preserved across regimes. We further show that deeper adaptation regimes are associated with larger update magnitudes, higher forgetting, and a stronger relationship between the two. These results show that comparative conclusions in CL can depend strongly on the chosen fine-tuning regime, motivating regime-aware evaluation protocols that treat trainable depth as an explicit experimental factor.

Federated continual learning (FCL) evaluates how distributed clients learn from changing data streams while retaining previously learned knowledge. Existing evaluations are difficult to compare because they often change datasets, task splits, client data splits, task orders, backbones, memory assumptions, and reporting rules simultaneously. We introduce \textbf{HERO}, a heterogeneity-aware benchmark library for FCL. HERO builds benchmark streams by separating three choices that are often coupled, namely the task split, the client data split, and the client task sequence. In HERO-Core, the main comparable benchmark, $α$ controls client data skew and $ρ$ controls task-order mismatch. We evaluate representative FCL methods on CIFAR-100 and TinyImageNet using final average accuracy, average forgetting, and bottom-10% client accuracy. We also include a graph-based Domain-IL portability case study on OGB-MolPCBA, where scaffold-domain granularity changes the input distribution while the prediction task remains fixed. Our results show that method behavior changes across easy and heterogeneous settings, that average accuracy can hide weak bottom-client performance, that task-order mismatch favors different strategies from synchronized evaluation, and that the same HERO interface can expose domain-shift difficulty beyond image-based FCIL. HERO releases benchmark streams, configurations, method implementations, and reporting scripts to support reproducible and setting-aware FCL evaluation.