Functional Subnetwork Localization for Efficient Continual Learning in Large Language Models
Authors: Shuoran Jiang, Wentao Zhu, Yang Xiang, Dongfeng Li, Yunan Zhang, Mengchen Zhao, Yuhui Guo, Kai Chen, Youcheng Pan, Xiangping Wu, Qingcai Chen
Organizations: School of Computer Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology (Shenzhen), Shenzhen, China · China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang, China · Peng Cheng Laboratory, Shenzhen, China · School of Science, Harbin Institute of Technology (Shenzhen), Shenzhen, China · Huaqiao University, Xiamen, China
Biological intelligence continually adapts to new information while retaining prior skills through localized plasticity. In contrast, continual learning in large language models (LLMs) remains vulnerable to catastrophic forgetting. A promising direction is to identify functionally specialized subnetworks within LLMs that enable targeted and resource-efficient adaptation. Using gradient-attribution profiling, we localize cognition-associated functional subnetworks exhibiting extremely low mutual overlap. Building on this finding, we propose Function-isolated Memory-Efficient Optimization (CiMEO), a continual learning framework that routes each training example to its corresponding functional subnetwork, restricting parameter updates and optimizer states to selected regions. Across 1.4 million sequential instructions, CiMEO achieves the highest average performance among the compared methods on five generative benchmarks spanning programming, examination-style tasks, and mathematical reasoning, while mitigating catastrophic forgetting. Subspace-overlap and principal-angle analyses further indicate that localized updates help preserve pre-trained representations, highlighting functional subnetwork localization as a practical approach to efficient and stable continual learning in LLMs.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: localized plasticity in human barin vs. global plasticity in LLMs. ( a ), Learning recruits and co-activates sparse neuronal ensembles (circles; color indicates activity) across memory-relevant regions, including the hippocampus (HPC), cortex, and subcortical areas, forming an engram. During the first hours to days after learning, synaptic connectivity is preferentially strengthened among HPC engram cells and between HPC and other regions, enabling recent memory expression. Over subsequent days to weeks, systems consolidation supported by hippocampo–cortical replay and synchronized activity (notably involving prefrontal cortex, PFC) promotes maturation of cortical engram cells. This process drives strengthening of synaptic connectivity between cortical-cortical and cortical-subcortical engram cells and a progressive shift in the engram cell network toward a higher dependency on cortical engram cells for remote memory expression. ( b ), Global parameter updates across sequential batches bring memory re-consolidation. During training on successive batches, learning is typically implemented via dense, global weight updates across the network. Lacking a brain-like mechanism of sparse engram allocation and multi-stage consolidation, new batches are absorbed by rewriting shared parameters, which can interfere with or overwrite earlier representations. As a result, the model’s “memory” is continually reconfigured by the order of batches, reflecting a stability–plasticity trade-off and potential forgetting under sequential learning.
Fig. 2: Framework for discovering endogenous cognitive modularity in LLMs and applying it to memory-efficient training. a , We construct a cognitive corpus from the AM-DeepSeek-R1-Distilled-1.4M instruction dataset, where each instruction is annotated with a Bloom’s taxonomy label. b , Cognition-isolated subnetworks are identified via gradient attribution: labelled instructions are fed into the LLM to predict cognition categories, and the gradients accumulated during back-propagation are aggregated to locate cognition-sensitive subnetworks. c , The state-serialized AdamW optimizer maintains a mapping between sparse parameters and their locations in the original dense tensors, so that only cognition-relevant subnetworks are activated and updated during training. d , For continual learning, CiMEO employs a cognitive classifier to assign a cognition label to each input and routes optimization to the corresponding local subnetwork. e , Experiments on five benchmarks report detailed incremental learning and anti-forgetting performance, together with weight-space dynamics during continual learning. f , We further analyze subspace overlap and principal angles across checkpoints to quantify interference and stability in the learned weight subspaces.
Fig. 3: The cognition-isolated subnetwork overlap rate analysis. a , The average overlaps across all layers on all cognition pairs. b , The average overlap rates over all cognition pairs across all layers. c , The detailed overlaps over every cognition pair and all layers.
Models
humaneval_cn
gaokao
cmmlu
ceval
gsm8k
pass@1
Acc (%)
Acc (%)
Acc (%)
Acc (%)
Avg
Qwen3-1.5B-Base
4.27
5.14
0.02
58.01
66.87
26.86
Full-Parameter
Adamw
3.05
11.42
0.00
67.40
39.27
24.23
PEFT
Lora
3.66
6.99
0.02
60.44
68.08
27.84
Miss
8.54
11.15
0.00
66.73
66.79
30.64
Bone
9.76
11.29
0.00
66.62
66.87
30.91
TABLE I: The testing results on 5 benchmarks of fine-tuned Qwen3-1.5B with different continual learning methods. The metric for HumanEval-CN uses pass@1, and other four benchmarks adopt percentage of accurate predictions.
Fig. 4: The forgetting and incremental rates on five benchmarks for all compared baselines. ( a ) for HumanEval-CN, ( b ) for GaoKaoBench-2010, ( c ) for CMMLU, ( d ) for GSM8K, ( e ) for CEval, and ( f ) is the average over all five benchmarks.
Fig. 5: The weight stability analysis. ( a ), The maximum principle angles between Qwen3-1.5B and all compared methods fine-tuned checkpoints across all layers, and ( d ) average over layers. ( b ), The maximum principle angles between Qwen3-1.5B and all compared methods fine-tuned checkpoints across all layers, and ( e ) average over layers. ( c ), the subspace overlaps between Qwen3-1.5B and different methods fine-tuned checkpoints across all layers, and ( f ) average over layers.
Large language models (LLMs) often suffer from catastrophic forgetting in continual learning: after learning new tasks sequentially, they perform worse on earlier tasks. Existing methods mitigate catastrophic forgetting by data replay, parameter freezing, or regularization. However, these methods lack understanding of LLM mechanisms and cannot distinguish which parameters store important knowledge from previous tasks and which parameters can be updated for new tasks. To address this, we propose the attribution-guided continual fine-tuning framework that leverages Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP) to estimate parameter importance based on the internal computational process of LLMs. During continual learning, parameters critical to previous tasks are constrained to receive smaller updates, while less relevant parameters remain available for learning new tasks. Extensive experiments show that, compared with baseline methods, our approach reduces catastrophic forgetting while preserving adaptability to new tasks, highlighting the value of mechanistic attribution for continual fine-tuning of LLMs.
Yazheng Liu, Yuxuan Wan, Rui Xu +3
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou), Guangzhou, China · The Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China
Large language models (LLMs) can learn new tasks through fine-tuning, but learning tasks sequentially often leads to catastrophic forgetting of earlier ones. This paper proposes CRAFT, a continual learning framework that keeps model weights frozen and instead learns low-rank interventions on hidden representations. Similar tasks share an intervention to help knowledge transfer, with similarity judged by how each task alters the model's output distribution rather than by a learned gating network. Within a shared intervention, a Kullback-Leibler (KL) penalty keeps each new task close to the intervention's existing behavior, which limits forgetting of earlier tasks, while a small, task-private intervention in the deepest layers preserves dedicated capacity that later tasks cannot overwrite. The learned interventions also make it possible to identify the task at test time, so task identity labels are not needed. Across multiple benchmarks and model scales, CRAFT improves overall performance and reduces forgetting compared with strong LoRA-based methods, while remaining robust to task ordering.
Md Anwar Hossen, Fatema Siddika, Juan Pablo Munoz +2
Iowa State University · Maro Systems, USA · University of California, Berkeley +1
Continual learning in Large Language Models (LLMs) is hindered by the plasticity-stability dilemma, where acquiring new capabilities often leads to catastrophic forgetting of previous knowledge. Existing methods typically treat parameters uniformly, failing to distinguish between specific task knowledge and shared capabilities. We introduce Mixture of Sparse Experts for Task-Agnostic Continual Learning (SETA), a framework that resolves the plasticity-stability conflict through adaptive sparse subspace decomposition into task-specific expert modules. Unlike standard updates, where tasks compete for the same parameters, SETA separates knowledge into unique experts, designed to isolate task-specific patterns, and shared experts, responsible for capturing common features. SETA shares an overlapping parameter block only when the new task's update passes a subspace-agreement test and a sign test against its prior expert; shared knowledge is protected by adaptive elastic anchoring, and independently gated routers retrieve the relevant experts at inference without task identifiers. Extensive experiments across diverse domain-specific benchmarks demonstrate that SETA achieves competitive or superior overall performance relative to state-of-the-art continual learning baselines, improving overall performance over the strongest baseline by 1.1 to 1.7 points on TRACE and by up to 5.5 points on the O-LoRA benchmark, with backward transfer between -2.2 and -1.3 on TRACE, against 4.6 to 6.3 points of forgetting for MoE-CL and 8 to 15 points for the other LoRA baselines.
Fatema Siddika, Md Anwar Hossen, Tanwi Mallick +1
Iowa State University, Ames, USA · Argonne National Laboratory, USA