Plasticity of Growing and Elastic Neural Networks in Online Continual Learning

In a continual learning setting, we require a model to be plastic enough to learn a new task and stable enough to not disturb previously learned capabilities. We argue that this dilemma has an architectural root. A finite network has limited representational and plastic resources, yet the required capacity depends on properties of the future task stream that are unknown: how many tasks will be encountered, and how much they overlap in feature space. Regularization-based methods preserve past knowledge within fixed-capacity architectures and therefore implicitly rely on an oracle architecture sized for this unknown future. When tasks are only weakly related, fixed architectures progressively run out of plastic resources; when tasks are few or strongly overlapping, models are often over-provisioned. Inspired by neurogenesis in biology, we propose NORACL to address the stability-plasticity dilemma by tackling the oracle architecture problem through neuronal growth. Starting from a compact network, NORACL grows only when needed by monitoring two complementary signals for representational and plasticity saturation. We evaluate NORACL against oracle-sized static baselines across varying task counts and geometries. Across all settings, NORACL achieves final average accuracies that are better than or on par with oracle-provisioned static baselines while using fewer parameters. Additionally, NORACL yields architectures with interpretable growth, i.e. dissimilar tasks predominantly expand feature-extraction layers, whereas tasks which rely on common features shift growth toward later feature-combination layers. Our analysis further explains why fixed-capacity networks lose plasticity as tasks accumulate, whereas NORACL creates fresh capacity for new tasks through growth. Together, these results show that adaptive neurogenesis pushes the stability-plasticity Pareto frontier of continual learning.

Standard deep-learning pipelines usually choose the network architecture before training and keep it fixed throughout optimization. In contrast, a model can also be adapted by editing its structure during training, for example by pruning existing hidden-neuron units or growing new ones. Although growth is appealing for adaptive and continual systems, we show that it is not simply the inverse of pruning. Pruning selects among units that have participated in training from the start, whereas growth inserts new units into an already specialized optimization trajectory. We isolate this insertion problem and show that newborn units are often forward-active but backward-starved: they participate in the forward computation, yet receive much weaker gradient signal than incumbent units. This disadvantage is minor in small MLP benchmarks, but becomes clear in harder image-classification settings with a convolutional trunk. In these settings, \textsc{Grow} can achieve high final accuracy during the structural-editing procedure, while \textsc{Prune} is stronger when performance is averaged over the training trajectory or when the final sparse network is retrained from scratch. Interventions targeting optimizer state, insertion, selection, and trainability show that improving the integration of newborn units can improve adaptive performance, but does not automatically produce better final subnetworks. In continual-learning benchmarks stressing plasticity loss, \textsc{Grow} becomes competitive mainly when new units have enough time to integrate. Together, these results suggest that \textsc{Grow} should be evaluated not only as an architecture-search operator, but as a time-sensitive optimization process whose success depends on insertion stability.

Early-exiting neural networks enable adaptive inference by allowing inputs to exit at intermediate classifiers, reducing computation for easy samples while maintaining high accuracy. In practice, exits can be trained sequentially by incrementally adding them to a shared backbone; however, this sequential training can cause newly introduced exits to interfere with previously learned ones, degrading the performance of earlier classifiers. We address this problem by retaining the knowledge embedded in existing exits while allowing new ones to specialize. We propose two alternative approaches that operate at different levels of the model. The first constrains learning by protecting parameters that are important for previously trained exits, while the second preserves the output distributions of earlier exits as the network adapts. These alternatives directly reflect the stability-plasticity trade-off studied in continual learning. Accordingly, we leverage \textit{Elastic Weight Consolidation} to constrain critical weights and \textit{Learning without Forgetting} to preserve output distributions. Experiments on standard benchmarks show that our approaches consistently improve early-exit performance, achieving higher accuracy over existing sequential training methods and significant performance speedups at low computational budgets.