Organizations: Institute of Information Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China · School of Cyber Security, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China
Continual multimodal instruction tuning requires multimodal large language models to acquire new task abilities sequentially while preserving previously learned knowledge. LoRA-MoE provides a promising solution by introducing expert-based capacity, but repeatedly learning and maintaining full LoRA experts leads to substantial parameter overhead. This raises a natural question: is full expert expansion necessary for every new task? To answer it, we analyze the SVD of task-specific LoRA updates and observe substantial overlap in their input- and output-side LoRA direction subspaces, with task-specific adaptation largely captured by lightweight coordinates over these subspaces. Motivated by this observation, we propose CoRe-MoE, a Compact Reusable MoE framework for parameter-efficient continual multimodal instruction tuning. CoRe-MoE extracts reusable input- and output-side direction bases from an initial expert bank, and for subsequent tasks trains only compact coordinate experts together with task-specific low-rank routers. Experiments on two representative MLLMs show that CoRe-MoE improves final average performance over the strongest competing baseline by up to 5.90 points, while using less than 1% of the trainable parameters required by sequential LoRA for later tasks. The code is publicly available at https://github.com/runzezz/CoRe-MoE.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: ArxivQA-to-ImageNet-R direction-subspace overlap. High SAR on both VA and UB indicates clear cross-task overlap.
Figure 2: Effect of frozen LoRA direction bases on later-task adaptation.
Figure 3: Overview of CoRe-MoE pipeline. In the initial task, CoRe-MoE trains a vanilla LoRA-MoE expert bank and converts it into reusable direction bases and coordinate matrices through compact coordinate conversion. For subsequent tasks, the direction bases are frozen, and only compact coordinate experts and task-specific routers are trained. During inference, visual and textual prototypes guide task-aware routing, while token-level routing is performed in the corresponding compact coordinate space.
Method
Eval.
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
CLEVR-Math
Flickr30k
Avg. (↑)
BWT final (↑)
Zero-shot
–
16.33%
53.83%
38.56
19.97%
20.40%
41.88
31.83%
–
Sequential Fine-Tuning
–
90.80%
93.07%
59.41
75.50%
72.70%
57.20
74.78%
–
LoRA-FT
Avg.
79.08%
80.85%
48.13
67.63%
55.10%
57.20
64.67%
-20.31%
Last
68.20%
75.43%
44.61
64.20%
37.50%
57.20
57.85%
HiDe
Avg.
88.64%
92.81%
49.25
67.84%
52.44%
53.36
67.39%
-5.98%
Last
85.67%
93.07%
44.67
64.63%
50.40%
53.36
65.30%
Table 1: Main results on the UCIT benchmark with LLaVA-1.5-7B. Avg. and Last denote continual-average and final-after-last-task performance, respectively. BWT final is computed after the last task. Best and second-best continual results are marked in bold and underlined, and red numbers indicate gains over the second-best result.
Method
Eval.
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
Flickr30k
Avg. ( ↑ )
BWT final ( ↑ )
Zero-shot
–
28.30%
39.10%
42.72
31.17%
49.54
38.17%
–
Sequential Fine-Tuning
–
94.27%
91.23%
66.01
97.10%
60.93
82.51%
–
LoRA-FT
Avg.
86.17%
84.37%
59.40
95.83%
60.93
77.34%
-12.16%
Last
73.27%
79.90%
52.22
94.57%
60.93
72.18%
HiDe
Avg.
89.25%
83.92%
64.95
96.15%
60.42
78.94%
-6.27%
Last
86.33%
80.87%
59.30
94.67%
60.42
76.32%
Table 2: Main results on the UCIT benchmark with Qwen2-VL-7B. Avg. and Last denote continual-average and final performance, respectively. BWT final is computed after the last task. Bold/underline mark the best/second-best continual learning results, and red numbers indicate gains over the second-best result.
Method
Avg. (↑)
Last (↑)
BWT (↑)
Vanilla LoRA-MoE ( r=16 )
73.21
73.21
-0.01
Budget-Matched LoRA-MoE
70.61
70.61
-0.01
CoRe-MoE w/ LR Router
71.20
71.20
-0.02
+ Ortho Init w/ LR Router
67.02
66.97
-0.19
CoRe-MoE w/ Full Router
71.54
71.52
-0.07
+ Ortho Init w/ Full Router
71.07
71.05
-0.09
Table 3: Ablation results of expert parameterization, routing strategies, and basis initialization on LLaVA-1.5-7B.
Figure 4: Effect of α on task routing accuracy after completing all six UCIT tasks. The coefficient α balances textual and visual similarities.
Metric
RAVICF
AIRFCV
FRCAVI
CVIFAR
Last
71.20%
69.79%
69.71%
69.90%
Avg.
71.20%
69.80%
69.73%
69.91%
Table 4: Ablation results under different task orders. R, A, V, I, C, and F denote ImageNet-R, ArxivQA, VizWiz-caption, IconQA, CLEVR-Math, and Flickr30k.
Figure 5: Continual learning phase parameter efficiency on UCIT. Bars denote average trainable parameters per later task from Tasks 2–6, and the line denotes cumulative additional stored overhead after six tasks.
Appendix figures & tables13 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Setting
Avg. ( ↑ )
Last ( ↑ )
BWT ( ↑ )
λaux=10−3 , lr= 2×10−4
71.20
71.20
-0.02
λaux=0 , lr= 2×10−4
70.78
70.83
-0.03
λaux=10−3 , lr= 1×10−4
68.51
68.50
-0.03
λaux=10−3 , lr= 5×10−5
66.36
66.30
-0.03
Appendix
Table 5: Hyperparameter study on LLaVA-1.5-7B. Task 1 is trained with a fixed vanilla LoRA-MoE configuration using lr= 2×10−4 . We then fix the Task 1 result and tune the auxiliary load-balancing loss coefficient λaux and learning rate for Task 2–Task 6.
Figure 6: Cumulative parameter overhead over the base model after each UCIT task.
Figure 7: Confusion matrix of CLIP-based task routing after completing all six UCIT tasks.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
CLEVR-Math
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
90.80%
–
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
87.87%
93.07%
–
–
–
–
VizWiz
74.70%
88.90%
59.41
–
–
–
IconQA
76.37%
70.30%
44.33
75.50%
–
–
CLEVR-Math
76.53%
76.60%
44.18
63.20%
72.70%
–
Flickr30k
68.20%
75.43%
44.61
64.20%
37.50%
57.20
Appendix
Table 6: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of LLaVA-1.5-7B with LoRA-FT.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
CLEVR-Math
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
91.20%
–
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
90.43%
92.77%
–
–
–
–
VizWiz
79.73%
91.17%
59.83
–
–
–
IconQA
80.87%
76.87%
53.32
76.00%
–
–
CLEVR-Math
78.33%
78.27%
50.67
68.63%
74.87%
–
Flickr30k
69.40%
78.37%
44.17
67.93%
48.90%
57.36
Appendix
Table 7: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of LLaVA-1.5-7B with MoELoRA.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
CLEVR-Math
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
91.47%
–
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
90.13%
89.93%
–
–
–
–
VizWiz
88.53%
90.00%
46.53
–
–
–
IconQA
87.70%
79.07%
44.80
72.93%
–
–
CLEVR-Math
86.13%
78.60%
43.70
67.77%
68.07%
–
Flickr30k
84.37%
78.33%
44.54
64.93%
51.70%
57.41
Appendix
Table 8: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of LLaVA-1.5-7B with CL-MoE.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
CLEVR-Math
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
90.47%
–
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
90.47%
92.13%
–
–
–
–
VizWiz
90.47%
92.13%
56.87
–
–
–
IconQA
90.47%
92.13%
56.87
65.73%
–
–
CLEVR-Math
90.47%
91.97%
56.87
65.73%
66.37%
–
Flickr30k
90.47%
91.97%
56.91
65.73%
66.37%
55.74
Appendix
Table 9: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of LLaVA-1.5-7B with CoRe-MoE.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
CLEVR-Math
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
91.43%
–
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
90.40%
93.87%
–
–
–
–
VizWiz
89.10%
92.47%
55.73
–
–
–
IconQA
88.10%
92.23%
49.65
72.57%
–
–
CLEVR-Math
87.03%
93.07%
46.68
66.33%
54.47%
–
Flickr30k
85.67%
93.07%
44.67
64.63%
50.40%
53.36
Appendix
Table 10: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of LLaVA-1.5-7B with HiDe.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
94.27%
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
93.00%
91.23%
–
–
–
VizWiz
85.40%
86.83%
66.01
–
–
IconQA
84.93%
79.50%
59.97
97.10%
–
Flickr30k
73.27%
79.90%
52.22
94.57%
60.93
Appendix
Table 11: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of Qwen2-VL-7B-Instruct with LoRA-FT.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
94.20%
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
93.13%
91.13%
–
–
–
VizWiz
82.23%
85.77%
66.32
–
–
IconQA
79.93%
79.17%
62.60
97.50%
–
Flickr30k
60.60%
79.07%
49.94
95.10%
60.92
Appendix
Table 12: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of Qwen2-VL-7B-Instruct with MoELoRA.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
94.03%
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
93.77%
95.23%
–
–
–
VizWiz
93.03%
95.17%
52.09
–
–
IconQA
92.77%
88.60%
51.74
95.03%
–
Flickr30k
90.57%
88.70%
51.53
91.93%
60.74
Appendix
Table 13: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of Qwen2-VL-7B-Instruct with CL-MoE.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
94.13%
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
94.13%
93.80%
–
–
–
VizWiz
94.13%
93.80%
65.52
–
–
IconQA
94.13%
93.87%
65.52
92.13%
–
Flickr30k
94.13%
93.87%
65.50
92.13%
60.71
Appendix
Table 14: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of Qwen2-VL-7B-Instruct with CoRe-MoE.
Training Step
ImageNet-R
ArxivQA
VizWiz
IconQA
Flickr30k
ImageNet-R
91.73%
–
–
–
–
ArxivQA
90.37%
88.40%
–
–
–
VizWiz
89.27%
85.70%
68.49
–
–
IconQA
88.53%
80.70%
67.07
97.63%
–
Flickr30k
86.33%
80.87%
59.30
94.67%
60.42
Appendix
Table 15: Detailed UCIT evaluation matrix of Qwen2-VL-7B-Instruct with HiDe.
Learning new tasks in multimodal continual instruction tuning can cause catastrophic forgetting of previously acquired knowledge. Although multi-expert LoRA distributes learning across experts, updates to a dense low-rank expert can still affect many output features. We introduce Monarch-MoE, which replaces the dense factors in LoRA experts with block-diagonal factors connected by a fixed permutation. This structure provides blockwise gradient isolation: individual block-pair updates affect only one output block, while connections between all input and output blocks are maintained. To make these compact experts practical on memory-limited hardware, we combine batched computation, fused forward operators, and an optimized backward pass. Across three continual-learning methods evaluated on MLLM-DCL and UCIT with LLaVA-1.5-7B, Monarch-MoE improves first-task retention while reducing adapter parameters by approximately 75% and 50%, respectively. In the main comparison, first-task forgetting is as low as 0.52 percentage points on MLLM-DCL and 0.10 on UCIT, with method-dependent trade-offs in final performance. Our implementation supports fine-tuning and inference on a single 24 GB RTX 4090, with lower measured memory use and competitive runtime in the evaluated settings. Together, these algorithmic and systems improvements make structured experts a practical option for continual adaptation on memory-limited hardware.
Xi Zhang, Boyu Diao, Zesen Chen +3
Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences · University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · ShanghaiTech University
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) unify heterogeneous vision-language tasks under a shared generative framework via instruction tuning, yet real-world deployment demands continuous capability expansion, making Multimodal Continual Instruction Tuning (MCIT) essential. Existing methods either update all tasks with a shared parameter set or allocate dedicated modules for each new task. Shared updates force heterogeneous tasks to compete, causing forgetting of learned capabilities. Conversely, isolated expansion prevents interference but severely limits parameter efficiency over long task streams. To address this dilemma, we propose CRAM. Specifically, by isolating task-specific patterns into independent modules, CRAM mitigates catastrophic forgetting across tasks. To further boost parameter efficiency, we utilize adaptive-rank instantiation to identify the capability gap between existing expert capability and new task demands, and dynamically allocate only the necessary parameters. To ensure stable reuse among tasks, centroid-guided routing recognizes and activates existing experts' capabilities, while an orthogonality penalty confines new updates to task-specific directions, preventing re-learning general capability. Extensive experiments across diverse benchmarks consistently demonstrate its superiority over existing methods.
Jun-Tao Tang, Zhen-Hao Xie, Yu-Cheng Shi +1
School of Artificial Intelligence, Nanjing University, China · State Key Laboratory of Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University, China
Catastrophic forgetting remains a major obstacle to continual learning in large language models (LLMs) and vision--language models (VLMs). Although Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures offer an efficient path to scaling, existing LoRA-based MoE continual learning methods still face a fundamental trade-off: they either isolate experts too aggressively, limiting knowledge transfer across tasks, or allow task-specific updates to overwrite important existing parameters, leading to severe forgetting. To address this, we propose CP-MoE, a continual learning framework built around a transient expert that captures early task-specific updates and guides their integration into stable experts. CP-MoE introduces a consistency-preserving routing bias, which uses the transient expert to estimate representation similarity with stable experts and steer routing towards more compatible expert selection, and a transient expert-guided regularisation mechanism, which selectively protects important historical parameters during merging. Together, these components reduce parameter interference and forgetting while preserving cross-task knowledge transfer. We validate CP-MoE on both unimodal and multimodal continual learning benchmarks with LLM-based and VLM-based MoE models. On SuperNI benchmark, spanning diverse sequential language tasks, CP-MoE achieves state-of-the-art performance and stronger zero-shot transfer to unseen tasks. On VQA v2 dataset, it scales effectively to multimodal visual reasoning, consistently reduces forgetting, and outperforms strong MoE baselines.
Yang Liu, Toan Nguyen, Flora D. Salim
School of Computer Science and Engineering University of New South Wales Australia