REVIEW 2 cited by
Anatomy of Catastrophic Forgetting: Hidden Representations and Task Semantics
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
A central challenge in developing versatile machine learning systems is catastrophic forgetting: a model trained on tasks in sequence will suffer significant performance drops on earlier tasks. Despite the ubiquity of catastrophic forgetting, there is limited understanding of the underlying process and its causes. In this paper, we address this important knowledge gap, investigating how forgetting affects representations in neural network models. Through representational analysis techniques, we find that deeper layers are disproportionately the source of forgetting. Supporting this, a study of methods to mitigate forgetting illustrates that they act to stabilize deeper layers. These insights enable the development of an analytic argument and empirical picture relating the degree of forgetting to representational similarity between tasks. Consistent with this picture, we observe maximal forgetting occurs for task sequences with intermediate similarity. We perform empirical studies on the standard split CIFAR-10 setup and also introduce a novel CIFAR-100 based task approximating realistic input distribution shift.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Adapt, But Don't Forget: Fine-Tuning and Contrastive Routing for Lane Detection under Distribution Shift
A modular branching method with contrastive routing preserves source lane detection performance while adapting to target distributions with fewer trained parameters.
-
Exploring Kolmogorov-Arnold Network Expansions in Vision Transformers for Mitigating Catastrophic Forgetting in Continual Learning
KAN-based ViTs show slight average incremental accuracy gains over MLP-ViTs in continual learning, but the paper's own data show worse forgetting on CIFAR-100 and worse last-task accuracy on MNIST.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.