Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 61 references

LADA: Scalable Label-Specific CLIP Adapter for Continual Learning

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Per-class vectors keep CLIP learning without task selectors

desk verdict Solid new mechanism with a reproducibility gap: the missing fusion weight and β make the exact SOTA margins unverifiable, but the core claim holds and the paper deserves careful review. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23271 v1 pith:RMMMR63Q submitted 2025-05-29 cs.CV cs.LG

Mao-Lin Luo , Zi-Hao Zhou , Tong Wei , Min-Ling Zhang This is my paper
classification cs.CVcs.LG
keywords continuallearningCLIPlabel-specificadaptervision-languagemodelscatastrophicforgettingcross-domaintask-agnosticincrementalparameter-efficientfine-tuningprototypedistillation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper introduces LADA, an adapter that lets a frozen CLIP model learn new tasks continually without choosing among task-specific parameters at inference time. Instead of partitioning parameters across tasks, LADA attaches a small set of learnable memory vectors to each class and classifies by taking inner products between the frozen image representation and these label-specific vectors. Old class vectors are frozen and new ones are added as tasks arrive, while feature distillation over cluster-center prototypes of previous classes protects old knowledge. The authors claim this design reduces both forward and backward forgetting and achieves state-of-the-art Transfer, Average, and Last accuracies on the 10-dataset X-TAIL benchmark in both 16-shot and full-shot settings.

What carries the argument

The central object is the label-specific memory unit: for each class j of task k, a set of λ1 vectors W^k_j initialized by k-means cluster centers of that class's CLIP image features. The image representation is mapped to label-specific features by φ(i) = [W_1 i, ..., W_M i], and a fixed head outputs exp(−β(1−x)) for each class, acting like a nearest-neighbor classifier. Old units are frozen and new units are added per task, while distribution-preserved training fits a Gaussian mixture model to each old class and samples augmented prototypes to compute the distillation loss. The overall framework sums the LADA logits with the text-encoder logits, applying a linear weighting for seen classes during inference.

What would settle it

Sweep the weighting hyperparameter over a grid on X-TAIL and check whether the reported Transfer, Average, and Last numbers require a value selected with test-set labels; also re-run RAIL with Transfer reported under the same protocol and see whether LADA's 2.5-2.9% Transfer advantage persists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

LADA claims that continual learning with vision-language models need not rely on inference-time selection of prompts or adapters, and that per-class memory vectors appended to a frozen CLIP image encoder are enough to achieve state-of-the-art results. Each class is represented by k-means-initialized vectors, and the classifier is a fixed nearest-neighbor-style map using an exponential kernel on inner products. Training freezes the vectors of previously seen classes, updates only the new task's vectors, and uses GMM-augmented prototypes of old classes in the loss to preserve their feature distribution. On X-TAIL, the reported gains over the previous best approach are 2.5% Transfer, 1.4% Average, and 0.8% Last in the 16-shot setting, and 2.9%, 2.4%, and 2.9% in the full-shot setting.

Load-bearing premise

The reported gains assume the linear weight between LADA logits and text-feature logits for seen classes is a fixed hyperparameter rather than a value tuned on the X-TAIL test sets, and that the baselines are directly comparable under a shared inference protocol.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • LADA removes the error-prone parameter-selection step of prompt- and MoE-based methods, so inference is a single forward pass over a unified feature space.
  • Because only the current task's label-specific vectors are updated and CLIP is frozen, training cost and memory grow only gradually as tasks accumulate.
  • Feature distillation with GMM-augmented prototypes preserves old-class distributions, mitigating both backward forgetting and forward forgetting of pretrained knowledge.
  • On several X-TAIL tasks, LADA's Transfer accuracy exceeds that of vanilla zero-shot CLIP, indicating that learned knowledge can improve classification of unseen classes.
  • The method is effective in both the 16-shot and full-shot settings, with larger margins in full-shot.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The linear weighting between LADA logits and text-feature logits for seen classes is described but never quantified; reporting that value and its sensitivity would let others reproduce the exact numbers and test whether it transfers across benchmarks.
  • Because LADA is independent of the image encoder's internal structure, the same per-class memory mechanism could be applied to other frozen foundation encoders beyond CLIP.
  • The GMM-based prototype augmentation could be lifted out as a general replay-free forgetting defense for other continual classifiers.
  • It would be worth testing LADA on longer task sequences and open-set settings to see whether the growth of memory units and the seen/unseen decision rule hold up.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes LADA, a label-specific CLIP adapter for cross-domain task-agnostic incremental learning (X-TAIL). LADA attaches per-class k-means cluster centers as lightweight memory units after a frozen CLIP image encoder, updates only the current task's units, and uses GMM-based augmented prototypes of previous classes plus feature distillation to mitigate backward and forward forgetting. A fine-tuned text encoder is jointly optimized, and inference combines LADA logits with text-feature logits for seen classes. On the X-TAIL benchmark under 16-shot and full-shot settings, the paper reports improvements in Transfer, Average, and Last over prior methods, with gains of 2.5/1.4/0.8 percentage points in the 16-shot setting and 2.9/2.4/2.9 in the full-shot setting.

Significance. If the reported results hold, LADA is a clean and practical contribution: it avoids inference-time prompt or adapter selection, requires no gradient flow to the CLIP image encoder, and scales parameter growth linearly with classes. The paper's strengths include a publicly available implementation, ablations that support the role of LADA and distribution-preserving training, and evaluation on a held-out benchmark with standard metrics. The core ideas—label-specific memory units and prototype distillation—are not entirely new in isolation, but their combination in a selector-free inference scheme is sensible, and the efficiency analysis is useful. The empirical case, however, rests on several unquantified choices and an asymmetric baseline comparison, so the state-of-the-art claim needs additional validation before it can be accepted at face value.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.2 (Overall Framework)] The inference-time fusion between LADA logits and text-feature logits for seen classes is never specified. The text says only that the final prediction is obtained by 'applying a linear weighting between the logits produced by LADA and the corresponding text features,' with no equation, numerical value, or sensitivity analysis. Since the text-only BF baseline already reaches 59.4/70.9/82.1 in the 16-shot setting (Table 3), the magnitude of the reported gains depends directly on this weight; if the weight was tuned on the X-TAIL test or validation splits, the comparison to fixed-protocol baselines is informal. Please report the exact fusion rule and an ablation over the weight. In the same passage, the two-stage procedure 'if the predicted class belongs to unseen classes' is ambiguous: it is not clear how the initial prediction that decides between text-only and weighted logits is made.
  2. [§4.1 (Main Results)] RAIL's Transfer results are omitted because RAIL uses a zero-shot CLIP selector, and the paper states that reported RAIL Transfer numbers directly use vanilla CLIP zero-shot accuracy. This is a legitimate protocol concern, but it means the headline Transfer improvement (2.5% in 16-shot and 2.9% in full-shot over the best listed baseline) is established only against methods that do not use the selector. To support a state-of-the-art claim for Transfer, the authors should either run RAIL under the same no-selector protocol or explicitly scope the claim to selector-free methods. Figure 3 provides LADA's task-recall with and without the selector but does not provide RAIL's task-recall under the same protocol, so it does not resolve the comparison.
  3. [§4.1 and 'Implementation Details'] All reported numbers are single runs with no error bars or seed information. The headline margins are small—0.8 percentage points in 16-shot Last and 1.4 in 16-shot Average—so run-to-run variance could change which method is best. Please report mean and standard deviation over at least three random seeds, and state whether hyperparameters (including β in Eq. (6) and the fusion weight) were selected on validation data or on the benchmark test splits.
  4. [Eq. (6) and 'Implementation Details'] The sharpness parameter β in Eq. (6) is described as modulating the transformation ϕ but its value is never given in the implementation details or in Appendix B. Because ϕ defines the mapping from inner products to logits and directly affects the loss in Eqs. (7), (8), and (10), the method is not fully reproducible without this value. Please report β and, if it varies across tasks or settings, describe how it is set.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table 3] The checkmark-only table does not explicitly label which rows correspond to BF+LADA versus BF+DPT; the prose order implies a specific pairing, but the table should name each configuration to avoid ambiguity.
  2. [Eq. (15)] In Appendix B, the AdaptFormer formula uses X and X′ without defining their dimensions or distinguishing the input to the first layer from the output of the multi-head attention; please clarify the notation.
  3. [Figure 3] The two panels use inconsistent legends: panel (a) shows 'w/o Selector' and 'w Selector' curves, while panel (b) shows only 'Acc Diff.'; please make the legends and axis labels uniform across panels.
  4. [Table 4] The asterisk on λ1=32 is explained only in the body text, not in the table caption or footnote; please move the explanation into the table caption.
  5. [Abstract and §4.5] The dataset name is written as 'Sun397' in at least one place in §4.5 and as 'SUN397' elsewhere; please standardize the capitalization.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims are empirical evaluations against held-out X-TAIL test splits; no derivation reduces to its inputs or to self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's central claims ('LADA achieves state-of-the-art performance in continual learning settings' in the Abstract; 'our method outperforms the previous best approach' in Section 4.1) are supported by evaluations on the X-TAIL benchmark, with the Transfer metric measured on future tasks that are not used to train LADA's label-specific memory units. The label-specific features are initialized from k-means cluster centers of the current task's CLIP features (Eq. 5), fine-tuned with cross-entropy on current-task samples and GMM-augmented prototypes of previous tasks (Eqs. 7 and 10); the final prediction for seen classes is then a linear weighting of LADA logits and text-feature logits (Section 3.2, Overall Framework). None of these steps defines the reported accuracy in terms of an input fit: the Transfer, Average, and Last numbers come from held-out test images, and the method's hyperparameters (λ1=16, λ2=4) are stated, while the fusion weight itself is not quantified. The unquantified weighting is a reproducibility and comparability concern, not a circular reduction, and the exclusion of RAIL's Transfer results is an explicitly argued protocol difference rather than a self-referential justification. There is no load-bearing self-citation, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz smuggled in through the authors' own prior work. The paper is therefore self-contained as an empirical claim; any weakness lies in incomplete reporting of the fusion weight and potential benchmark-specific tuning, which are correctness risks, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method's empirical success rests on standard domain assumptions: frozen CLIP features remain discriminative; k-means centers capture per-class structure; GMM-augmented prototypes preserve old-task distributions; and distillation on these prototypes prevents forgetting. The free parameters are hyperparameters chosen by hand or unreported; no new entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • lambda_1 (LADA memory dimension) = 16
    Number of k-means cluster centers per class in Eq. (5); chosen by hand, shown to have minimal effect in Table 4.
  • lambda_2 (distilled prototypes per class) = 4
    Number of GMM components / distilled prototypes per old class in Eqs. (8)-(11); chosen by hand.
  • beta (logit sharpness) = not reported
    Sharpness in phi(x)=exp(-beta(1-x)) in Eq. (6); no value or sensitivity analysis given.
  • fusion weight between LADA and text logits (seen classes) = not reported
    Described as 'linear weighting' in Section 3.2 (Overall Framework); no equation or value, so it may have been tuned on the benchmark.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Frozen CLIP image features provide a stable, transferable feature space for the lifetime of the model
    LADA attaches after the frozen encoder and never updates f_I (Section 3.2); the whole method relies on CLIP features not drifting.
  • domain assumption K-means cluster centers of per-class training features are representative class prototypes
    Eq. (5) constructs label-specific features from k-means centers; if centers are poor, the adapter starts from a bad initialization.
  • domain assumption Gaussian Mixture Models plus noisy augmented prototypes approximate the old-class feature distribution well enough for distillation
    Eqs. (9)-(11) use GMM parameters to generate augmented prototypes; the distillation loss in Eq. (10) then assumes these cover the old class distribution.
  • domain assumption Distillation on cluster centers and augmented prototypes prevents catastrophic forgetting
    The method's stability claim rests on the belief that a handful of prototypes per class suffices; ablation (Table 3) supports this empirically but no guarantee is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of LADA: Scalable Label-Specific CLIP Adapter for Continual Learning." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RMMMR63Q

@misc{pith2026250523271,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: LADA: Scalable Label-Specific CLIP Adapter for Continual Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RMMMR63Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23271}
}
read the original abstract

Continual learning with vision-language models like CLIP offers a pathway toward scalable machine learning systems by leveraging its transferable representations. Existing CLIP-based methods adapt the pre-trained image encoder by adding multiple sets of learnable parameters, with each task using a partial set of parameters. This requires selecting the expected parameters for input images during inference, which is prone to error that degrades performance. To address this problem, we introduce LADA (Label-specific ADApter). Instead of partitioning parameters across tasks, LADA appends lightweight, label-specific memory units to the frozen CLIP image encoder, enabling discriminative feature generation by aggregating task-agnostic knowledge. To prevent catastrophic forgetting, LADA employs feature distillation for seen classes, preventing their features from being interfered with by new classes. Positioned after the image encoder, LADA prevents gradient flow to the frozen CLIP parameters, ensuring efficient training. Extensive results show that LADA achieves state-of-the-art performance in continual learning settings. The implementation code is available at https://github.com/MaolinLuo/LADA.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.23271 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of CLIP tuning paradigms in continual learning. Our label-specific adapter leverages learned memory of all seen tasks and CLIP representations to generate label-specific features, eliminating the need for parameter selection. approaches can impede the model’s ability to effectively learn new tasks, leading to a suboptimal trade-off. Other prompt-based methods, such as L2P (Wang et al., 2022c), DualPrompt … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Accuracy (%) changes across all tasks over all learning steps in the full-shot setting. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Accuracy Difference (%) 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 Task Recall (%) w/o Selector w Selector (a) 16-shot setting 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Accuracy Difference (%) 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 Task Recall (%) Acc Diff. (b) Full-shot setting [PITH_FULL_I… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Comparison of whether to use zero-shot CLIP as a selec￾tor to distinguish between seen and unseen classes. Without the selector, LADA performs better in the continual learning process as it utilizes the learned knowledge to improve average task recall. class leads to moderate growth in time and memory costs. However, distilling a small number of prototypes is suffi￾cient for strong performance, making this a cost-ef… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Uncertainty-based continual learning with adaptive regularization

    Ahn, H., Cha, S., Lee, D., and Moon, T. Uncertainty-based continual learning with adaptive regularization. Advances in neural information processing systems (NeurIPS), 2019

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Food-101--mining discriminative components with random forests

    Bossard, L., Guillaumin, M., and Van Gool, L. Food-101--mining discriminative components with random forests. In European conference of computer vision (ECCV), 2014

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Adaptformer: Adapting vision transformers for scalable visual recognition

    Chen, S., Ge, C., Tong, Z., Wang, J., Song, Y., Wang, J., and Luo, P. Adaptformer: Adapting vision transformers for scalable visual recognition. Advances in neural information processing systems (NeurIPS), 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Describing textures in the wild

    Cimpoi, M., Maji, S., Kokkinos, I., Mohamed, S., and Vedaldi, A. Describing textures in the wild. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2014

    work page 2014

  5. [5]

    A continual learning survey: Defying forgetting in classification tasks

    De Lange, M., Aljundi, R., Masana, M., Parisot, S., Jia, X., Leonardis, A., Slabaugh, G., and Tuytelaars, T. A continual learning survey: Defying forgetting in classification tasks. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence (TPAMI), 2021

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    The mnist database of handwritten digit images for machine learning research [best of the web]

    Deng, L. The mnist database of handwritten digit images for machine learning research [best of the web]. IEEE signal processing magazine, 2012

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale

    Dosovitskiy, A., Beyer, L., Kolesnikov, A., Weissenborn, D., Zhai, X., Unterthiner, T., Dehghani, M., Minderer, M., Heigold, G., Gelly, S., Uszkoreit, J., and Houlsby, N. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2021

    2021

  8. [8]

    Dytox: Transformers for continual learning with dynamic token expansion

    Douillard, A., Ram \'e , A., Couairon, G., and Cord, M. Dytox: Transformers for continual learning with dynamic token expansion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 61 references
  1. [9]

    Learning generative visual models from few training examples: An incremental bayesian approach tested on 101 object categories

    Fei-Fei, L., Fergus, R., and Perona, P. Learning generative visual models from few training examples: An incremental bayesian approach tested on 101 object categories. In Conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshop, 2004

    2004

  2. [10]

    French, R. M. Catastrophic forgetting in connectionist networks. Trends in cognitive sciences, 1999

    1999

  3. [11]

    and Wei, T

    Gan, K. and Wei, T. Erasing the bias: fine-tuning foundation models for semi-supervised learning. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Clip-adapter: Better vision-language models with feature adapters

    Gao, P., Geng, S., Zhang, R., Ma, T., Fang, R., Zhang, Y., Li, H., and Qiao, Y. Clip-adapter: Better vision-language models with feature adapters. International journal of computer vision (IJCV), 2024

    2024

  5. [13]

    Eurosat: A novel dataset and deep learning benchmark for land use and land cover classification

    Helber, P., Bischke, B., Dengel, A., and Borth, D. Eurosat: A novel dataset and deep learning benchmark for land use and land cover classification. IEEE Journal of selected topics in applied earth observations and remote sensing, 2019

    2019

  6. [14]

    Parameter-efficient transfer learning for nlp

    Houlsby, N., Giurgiu, A., Jastrzebski, S., Morrone, B., De Laroussilhe, Q., Gesmundo, A., Attariyan, M., and Gelly, S. Parameter-efficient transfer learning for nlp. In International conference on machine learning (ICML), 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Re-evaluating continual learning scenarios: A categorization and case for strong baselines

    Hsu, Y. Re-evaluating continual learning scenarios: A categorization and case for strong baselines. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.12488, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Class-incremental learning with clip: Adaptive representation adjustment and parameter fusion

    Huang, L., Cao, X., Lu, H., and Liu, X. Class-incremental learning with clip: Adaptive representation adjustment and parameter fusion. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    and Cosgun, A

    Isele, D. and Cosgun, A. Selective experience replay for lifelong learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Npcl: Neural processes for uncertainty-aware continual learning

    Jha, S., Gong, D., Zhao, H., and Yao, L. Npcl: Neural processes for uncertainty-aware continual learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    A., Milan, K., Quan, J., Ramalho, T., Grabska-Barwinska, A., et al

    Kirkpatrick, J., Pascanu, R., Rabinowitz, N., Veness, J., Desjardins, G., Rusu, A. A., Milan, K., Quan, J., Ramalho, T., Grabska-Barwinska, A., et al. Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 2017

    2017

  12. [20]

    3d object representations for fine-grained categorization

    Krause, J., Stark, M., Deng, J., and Fei-Fei, L. 3d object representations for fine-grained categorization. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision workshops, 2013

    2013

  13. [21]

    R., Song, X., Ma, Z., He, Y., Gong, Y., Qi, Y., and Wei, X

    Kurniawan, M. R., Song, X., Ma, Z., He, Y., Gong, Y., Qi, Y., and Wei, X. Evolving parameterized prompt memory for continual learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Continual classification learning using generative models

    Lavda, F., Ramapuram, J., Gregorova, M., and Kalousis, A. Continual classification learning using generative models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.10612, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Learn to grow: A continual structure learning framework for overcoming catastrophic forgetting

    Li, X., Zhou, Y., Wu, T., Socher, R., and Xiong, C. Learn to grow: A continual structure learning framework for overcoming catastrophic forgetting. In International conference on machine learning (ICML), 2019

    2019

  16. [24]

    and Hoiem, D

    Li, Z. and Hoiem, D. Learning without forgetting. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence (TPAMI), 2017

    2017

  17. [25]

    and Ranzato, M

    Lopez-Paz, D. and Ranzato, M. Gradient episodic memory for continual learning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  18. [26]

    and Hutter, F

    Loshchilov, I. and Hutter, F. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    Adaptive rank, reduced forgetting: Knowledge retention in continual learning vision-language models with dynamic rank-selective lora

    Lu, H., Zhao, C., Xue, J., Yao, L., Moore, K., and Gong, D. Adaptive rank, reduced forgetting: Knowledge retention in continual learning vision-language models with dynamic rank-selective lora. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01004, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    An empirical study of catastrophic forgetting in large language models during continual fine-tuning

    Luo, Y., Yang, Z., Meng, F., Li, Y., Zhou, J., and Zhang, Y. An empirical study of catastrophic forgetting in large language models during continual fine-tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.08747, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Fine-grained visual classification of aircraft

    Maji, S., Rahtu, E., Kannala, J., Blaschko, M., and Vedaldi, A. Fine-grained visual classification of aircraft. arXiv preprint arXiv:1306.5151, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  22. [30]

    and Cohen, N

    McCloskey, M. and Cohen, N. J. Catastrophic interference in connectionist networks: The sequential learning problem. In Psychology of learning and motivation. Elsevier, 1989

    1989

  23. [31]

    D., Gong, D., Parvaneh, A., Abbasnejad, E., and Van den Hengel, A

    McDonnell, M. D., Gong, D., Parvaneh, A., Abbasnejad, E., and Van den Hengel, A. Ranpac: Random projections and pre-trained models for continual learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    and Zisserman, A

    Nilsback, M.-E. and Zisserman, A. Automated flower classification over a large number of classes. In 2008 Sixth Indian conference on computer vision, graphics & image processing, 2008

    2008

  25. [33]

    M., Vedaldi, A., Zisserman, A., and Jawahar, C

    Parkhi, O. M., Vedaldi, A., Zisserman, A., and Jawahar, C. Cats and dogs. In 2012 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2012

    2012

  26. [34]

    W., Hallacy, C., Ramesh, A., Goh, G., Agarwal, S., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Mishkin, P., Clark, J., et al

    Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Hallacy, C., Ramesh, A., Goh, G., Agarwal, S., Sastry, G., Askell, A., Mishkin, P., Clark, J., et al. Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. In International conference on machine learning (ICML), 2021

    2021

  27. [35]

    Rebuffi, S.-A., Kolesnikov, A., Sperl, G., and Lampert, C. H. icarl: Incremental classifier and representation learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2017

    2017

  28. [36]

    Experience replay for continual learning

    Rolnick, D., Ahuja, A., Schwarz, J., Lillicrap, T., and Wayne, G. Experience replay for continual learning. Advances in neural information processing systems (NeurIPS), 2019

    2019

  29. [37]

    A practitioner's guide to continual multimodal pretraining

    Roth, K., Udandarao, V., Dziadzio, S., Prabhu, A., Cherti, M., Vinyals, O., H \'e naff, O., Albanie, S., Bethge, M., and Akata, Z. A practitioner's guide to continual multimodal pretraining. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.14471, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Long-tail learning with foundation model: heavy fine-tuning hurts

    Shi, J.-X., Wei, T., Zhou, Z., Shao, J.-J., Han, X.-Y., and Li, Y.-F. Long-tail learning with foundation model: heavy fine-tuning hurts. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    K., Kim, J., and Kim, J

    Shin, H., Lee, J. K., Kim, J., and Kim, J. Continual learning with deep generative replay. Advances in neural information processing systems (NeurIPS), 2017

    2017

  32. [40]

    S., Karlinsky, L., Gutta, V., Cascante-Bonilla, P., Kim, D., Arbelle, A., Panda, R., Feris, R., and Kira, Z

    Smith, J. S., Karlinsky, L., Gutta, V., Cascante-Bonilla, P., Kim, D., Arbelle, A., Panda, R., Feris, R., and Kira, Z. Coda-prompt: Continual decomposed attention-based prompting for rehearsal-free continual learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer visio...

    2023

  33. [41]

    Mind the interference: Retaining pre-trained knowledge in parameter efficient continual learning of vision-language models

    Tang, L., Tian, Z., Li, K., He, C., Zhou, H., Zhao, H., Li, X., and Jia, J. Mind the interference: Retaining pre-trained knowledge in parameter efficient continual learning of vision-language models. In European conference on computer vision (ECCV), 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    When prompt-based incremental learning does not meet strong pretraining

    Tang, Y.-M., Peng, Y.-X., and Zheng, W.-S. When prompt-based incremental learning does not meet strong pretraining. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023

    2023

  35. [43]

    Hierarchical decomposition of prompt-based continual learning: Rethinking obscured sub-optimality

    Wang, L., Xie, J., Zhang, X., Huang, M., Su, H., and Zhu, J. Hierarchical decomposition of prompt-based continual learning: Rethinking obscured sub-optimality. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2024 a

    2024

  36. [44]

    A comprehensive survey of continual learning: theory, method and application

    Wang, L., Zhang, X., Su, H., and Zhu, J. A comprehensive survey of continual learning: theory, method and application. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI), 2024 b

    2024

  37. [45]

    S-prompts learning with pre-trained transformers: An occam’s razor for domain incremental learning

    Wang, Y., Huang, Z., and Hong, X. S-prompts learning with pre-trained transformers: An occam’s razor for domain incremental learning. Advances in neural information processing systems (NeurIPS), 2022 a

    2022

  38. [46]

    Dualprompt: Complementary prompting for rehearsal-free continual learning

    Wang, Z., Zhang, Z., Ebrahimi, S., Sun, R., Zhang, H., Lee, C.-Y., Ren, X., Su, G., Perot, V., Dy, J., et al. Dualprompt: Complementary prompting for rehearsal-free continual learning. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2022 b

    2022

  39. [47]

    Learning to prompt for continual learning

    Wang, Z., Zhang, Z., Lee, C.-Y., Zhang, H., Sun, R., Ren, X., Su, G., Perot, V., Dy, J., and Pfister, T. Learning to prompt for continual learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2022 c

    2022

  40. [48]

    Vision-language models are strong noisy label detectors

    Wei, T., Li, H.-T., Li, C., Shi, J.-X., Li, Y.-F., and Zhang, M.-L. Vision-language models are strong noisy label detectors. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2024

    2024

  41. [49]

    Y., Roelofs, R., Gontijo-Lopes, R., Morcos, A

    Wortsman, M., Ilharco, G., Gadre, S. Y., Roelofs, R., Gontijo-Lopes, R., Morcos, A. S., Namkoong, H., Farhadi, A., Carmon, Y., Kornblith, S., et al. Model soups: averaging weights of multiple fine-tuned models improves accuracy without increasing inference time. In Internation...

    2022

  42. [50]

    W., Li, M., Kornblith, S., Roelofs, R., Lopes, R

    Wortsman, M., Ilharco, G., Kim, J. W., Li, M., Kornblith, S., Roelofs, R., Lopes, R. G., Hajishirzi, H., Farhadi, A., Namkoong, H., et al. Robust fine-tuning of zero-shot models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2022 b

    2022

  43. [51]

    A., Oliva, A., and Torralba, A

    Xiao, J., Hays, J., Ehinger, K. A., Oliva, A., and Torralba, A. Sun database: Large-scale scene recognition from abbey to zoo. In IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2010

    2010

  44. [52]

    Advancing cross-domain discriminability in continual learning of vision-language models

    Xu, Y., Chen, Y., Nie, J., Wang, Y., Zhuang, H., and Okumura, M. Advancing cross-domain discriminability in continual learning of vision-language models. Advances in neural information processing systems (NeurIPS), 2024

    2024

  45. [53]

    Der: Dynamically expandable representation for class incremental learning

    Yan, S., Xie, J., and He, X. Der: Dynamically expandable representation for class incremental learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2021

    2021

  46. [54]

    Yoon, J., Yang, E., Lee, J., and Hwang, S. J. Lifelong learning with dynamically expandable networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2018

    2018

  47. [55]

    Boosting continual learning of vision-language models via mixture-of-experts adapters

    Yu, J., Zhuge, Y., Zhang, L., Hu, P., Wang, D., Lu, H., and He, Y. Boosting continual learning of vision-language models via mixture-of-experts adapters. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2024

    2024

  48. [56]

    Continual learning through synaptic intelligence

    Zenke, F., Poole, B., and Ganguli, S. Continual learning through synaptic intelligence. In International conference on machine learning (ICML), 2017

    2017

  49. [57]

    Slca: Slow learner with classifier alignment for continual learning on a pre-trained model

    Zhang, G., Wang, L., Kang, G., Chen, L., and Wei, Y. Slca: Slow learner with classifier alignment for continual learning on a pre-trained model. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023

    2023

  50. [58]

    Tip-adapter: Training-free adaption of clip for few-shot classification

    Zhang, R., Zhang, W., Fang, R., Gao, P., Li, K., Dai, J., Qiao, Y., and Li, H. Tip-adapter: Training-free adaption of clip for few-shot classification. In European conference on computer vision (ECCV), 2022

    2022

  51. [59]

    Preventing zero-shot transfer degradation in continual learning of vision-language models

    Zheng, Z., Ma, M., Wang, K., Qin, Z., Yue, X., and You, Y. Preventing zero-shot transfer degradation in continual learning of vision-language models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (CVPR), 2023

    2023

  52. [60]

    Prototype augmentation and self-supervision for incremental learning

    Zhu, F., Zhang, X.-Y., Wang, C., Yin, F., and Liu, C.-L. Prototype augmentation and self-supervision for incremental learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2021

    2021

  53. [61]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.