Organizations: ETH AI Center, Department of Computer Science, ETH Zürich · Mila - Quebec AI Institute, School of Computer Science, McGill University · Mila - Quebec AI Institute · University of Technology Nuremberg
Abstract
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.
In many real-world settings, data streams are nonstationary and arrive sequentially, requiring learning systems to adapt continuously without retraining from scratch. Continual learning (CL) addresses this challenge by incorporating new tasks while mitigating catastrophic forgetting, where learning new information degrades performance on previously acquired knowledge. We introduce a control-theoretic perspective on CL that explicitly regulates the evolution of forgetting, framing adaptation as a controlled process subject to long-term stability constraints. We focus on replay-based CL, where a finite memory buffer stores representative samples from prior tasks. We propose COntinual Learning with Drift-Plus-Penalty (COLD), a continual learning framework based on the Drift-Plus-Penalty (DPP) principle from stochastic optimization. To facilitate analysis, we also consider an oracle variant, COLD-ORACLE, as a reference benchmark. At each task, both methods minimize the current task loss while maintaining a virtual queue that tracks deviations from long-term stability on previously learned tasks, capturing the stability-plasticity trade-off as a regulated dynamical process. We establish stability and convergence guarantees that characterize this trade-off through a tunable control parameter. Experiments on standard benchmarks demonstrate that COLD consistently outperforms a broad range of state-of-the-art CL methods while providing competitive and controllable forgetting behavior through explicit regulation of stability and plasticity.
Continual learning studies how deployed language models can continually acquire new tasks without expensive retraining from scratch. Existing methods, whether rehearsal-based (replaying stored past data) or rehearsal-free (regularising or isolating parameters), overwhelmingly target one objective: preventing catastrophic forgetting. Forward transfer, the past helping the future, has meanwhile been pursued almost exclusively through parameter reuse, with no explicit account of when transfer should be expected at all. We begin one step earlier: before designing a transfer mechanism, we ask when transfer should exist at all. We answer with a framework of three measurable conditions: the target task must leave room for improvement beyond its own limited supervision, transferable information must survive continued optimisation, and replay must come from compatible previous tasks. We instantiate this view as Transfer-Selective Replay (TSR), which selects replay data predicted to benefit the incoming task rather than replaying past examples indiscriminately. Selection is guided by a zero-training task signature, while distillation preserves stability on previous tasks. Under the standard continual learning protocol in the low-budget regime, TSR consistently improves forward transfer while maintaining stability, outperforming existing replay baselines across heterogeneous and homogeneous task streams. More broadly, the results argue for treating transfer as a first-class objective of continual learning, to be understood before it is engineered.
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.