Convergence of Continual Learning in Homogeneous Deep Networks

Deep continual learning requires models to adapt to new tasks without retraining from scratch. However, neural networks can lose their ability to adapt to new tasks after training on previous ones, a phenomenon known as loss of plasticity. There have been several explanations and diagnostics proposed for plasticity loss. Motivated by the philosophy that "all models are wrong, but some are useful", we ask: can existing diagnostics predict a neural network's plasticity? In this work, we take a practical view to interpret plasticity as trainability, i.e., a neural network's future optimization gain on a target task. We first take a theoretical approach, showing, by constructing a few counterexamples, that some widely adopted diagnostics of plasticity, including representation rank and neural tangent kernel rank, can fail to predict the loss of trainability in both regression and classification settings. We instead propose a novel metric, called optimization readiness, which combines gradient strength and gradient reliability. We prove that optimization readiness lower bounds one-step optimization gain under standard smoothness assumptions, providing a theoretical guarantee for its predictive power. Empirically, we show that across commonly used deep continual learning settings, such as Slowly-Changing Regression and Permuted MNIST, optimization readiness more reliably ranks checkpoints by trainability than prior diagnostics, even with substantially fewer samples.

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.

Continual learning is an online paradigm where a learner continually accumulates knowledge from different tasks encountered over sequential time steps. Importantly, the learner is required to extend and update its knowledge without forgetting about the learning experience acquired from the past, and while avoiding the need to retrain from scratch. Given its sequential nature and its resemblance to the way humans think, continual learning offers an opportunity to address several challenges which currently stand in the way of widening the range of applicability of deep models to further real-world problems. The continual need to update the learner with data arriving sequentially strikes inherent congruence between continual learning and Bayesian inference which provides a principal platform to keep updating the prior beliefs of a model given new data, without completely forgetting the knowledge acquired from the old data. This survey inspects different settings of Bayesian continual learning, namely task-incremental learning and class-incremental learning. We begin by discussing definitions of continual learning along with its Bayesian setting, as well as the links with related fields, such as domain adaptation, transfer learning and meta-learning. Afterwards, we introduce a taxonomy offering a comprehensive categorization of algorithms belonging to the Bayesian continual learning paradigm. Meanwhile, we analyze the state-of-the-art while zooming in on some of the most prominent Bayesian continual learning algorithms to date. Furthermore, we shed some light on links between continual learning and developmental psychology, and correspondingly introduce analogies between both fields. We follow that with a discussion of current challenges, and finally conclude with potential areas for future research on Bayesian continual learning.