4.8 Article

A Continual Learning Survey: Defying Forgetting in Classification Tasks

Journal

Publisher

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TPAMI.2021.3057446

Keywords

Task analysis; Knowledge engineering; Neural networks; Training; Training data; Learning systems; Interference; Continual learning; lifelong learning; task incremental learning; catastrophic forgetting; classification; neural networks

Funding

  1. Huawei
  2. Generalitat de Catalunya [2019-FI_B2-00189]
  3. FWO Scholarship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article introduces the application of artificial neural networks in continual learning, focusing on task incremental classification. It proposes a new framework for continually evaluating the stability-plasticity trade-off of the network and performs experimental comparisons of 11 state-of-the-art continual learning methods, evaluating their strengths and weaknesses by considering different benchmark datasets.
Artificial neural networks thrive in solving the classification problem for a particular rigid task, acquiring knowledge through generalized learning behaviour from a distinct training phase. The resulting network resembles a static entity of knowledge, with endeavours to extend this knowledge without targeting the original task resulting in a catastrophic forgetting. Continual learning shifts this paradigm towards networks that can continually accumulate knowledge over different tasks without the need to retrain from scratch. We focus on task incremental classification, where tasks arrive sequentially and are delineated by clear boundaries. Our main contributions concern: (1) a taxonomy and extensive overview of the state-of-the-art; (2) a novel framework to continually determine the stability-plasticity trade-off of the continual learner; (3) a comprehensive experimental comparison of 11 state-of-the-art continual learning methods; and (4) baselines. We empirically scrutinize method strengths and weaknesses on three benchmarks, considering Tiny Imagenet and large-scale unbalanced iNaturalist and a sequence of recognition datasets. We study the influence of model capacity, weight decay and dropout regularization, and the order in which the tasks are presented, and qualitatively compare methods in terms of required memory, computation time, and storage.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available