Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 58 references

Unsupervised Video Continual Learning via Non-Parametric Deep Embedded Clustering

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A video model can keep learning from unlabelled streams by treating its feature space as a density landscape, clustering with kernel density estimation and replaying stored features to avoid forgetting.

desk verdict Useful problem setup and benchmark protocol, but the headline result is confounded by different backbones; same-feature clustering baselines are needed. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.21773 v1 pith:2TSMNHJ7 submitted 2025-08-29 cs.CV cs.AIcs.LG

Nattapong Kurpukdee , Adrian G. Bors This is my paper
classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.LG
keywords unsupervisedvideocontinuallearningkerneldensityestimationmean-shiftclusteringcatastrophicforgettingmemoryreplayactionrecognitionnon-parametric
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

The paper claims that a video model can continually learn a long sequence of unlabelled tasks—without task boundaries, class labels, or a pre-set number of classes—by maintaining a non-parametric density estimate of deep video features. It groups each task's videos through kernel density estimation and mean-shift clustering, stores a few features per discovered cluster for replay, and opens new clusters when incoming data looks novel. A linear readout version, uVCL-KDE-RBF, reaches 93.45% cluster accuracy on UCF101, 27.79% on HMDB51, and 8.07% on SSv2, while four existing continual-learning methods adapted to the same unsupervised setting fall far behind. If correct, this shows that strong unsupervised video transformers can be turned into continual learners with almost no trainable parameters and without any task-specific bookkeeping.

What carries the argument

Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) over deep-embedded video features: a non-parametric probability landscape where each data point places a Gaussian kernel. Mean-shift iteratively moves cluster centers to peaks of this landscape, discovering clusters without a pre-set count. Memory buffers (20 features per cluster) are replayed during later tasks, and a novelty threshold (Θ1 for feature distance, Θ2 for RBF softmax confidence) expands the cluster set. The RBF variant adds a linear layer trained with focal multi-class cross-entropy on pseudo-labels, which keeps trainable parameters near 100K while clusters grow.

What would settle it

Re-run the uVCL experiment on UCF101 with k-means or agglomerative clustering in place of mean-shift, using the same frozen video-transformer features, the same memory buffers of 20 features per cluster, the same 256-video mixed-class tasks, and the same RBF readout; if the cluster accuracy stays near 93%, then the KDE/mean-shift machinery is not the source of the improvement.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that unsupervised video continual learning reduces to maintaining a non-parametric probability density over a frozen feature space. The method uses a video transformer to embed each clip, then applies mean-shift clustering over a Gaussian-kernel density estimate to discover cluster peaks without knowing the number of clusters. A small memory buffer per peak is replayed when the next task arrives, and a novelty detector—based on distance to existing centers (uVCL-KDE) or on softmax confidence of a linear readout (uVCL-KDE-RBF)—decides when to add a new cluster. The reported result is that the RBF variant substantially outperforms iCaRL, iCaRL+CL, EWC, and MAS on three act

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the reported accuracy gain comes from the KDE clustering and novelty detection, not from the fact that the proposed method uses a much stronger pretrained video transformer than the baselines; if a simple clustering method on the same features matches the results, the central claim does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Unsupervised video continual learning becomes a feature-space bookkeeping problem: no labels, task boundaries, or class counts are needed.
  • Because the feature extractor is frozen, the method inherits the quality of the pretrained video transformer; better unsupervised video representations should directly lift cluster accuracy.
  • The near-zero backward forgetting suggests that KDE replay stabilizes old clusters while new ones are added, addressing the stability-plasticity trade-off with a single memory buffer.
  • The mixed-category, 256-video-per-task protocol gives a reproducible benchmark for future unsupervised video continual learning work on UCF101, HMDB51, and SSv2.
  • With roughly 100K trainable parameters and training times under a day for 659 SSv2 tasks, the approach is practical for resource-constrained continual learning.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The comparison is not apples-to-apples: the reported advantage may largely come from the much stronger frozen video transformer rather than from the KDE clustering itself; a k-means baseline on the same features would isolate the contribution.
  • The method's dependence on two hand-set thresholds (bandwidth h and novelty threshold Θ2) suggests an extension where those are adapted online—for example, from local density or replay confidence—could make it more robust across datasets.
  • Storing features rather than raw videos and replaying them into a KDE landscape transfers directly to image and audio continual learning, where the same non-parametric machinery applies.
  • If the frozen feature space already separates classes well, the method may be better described as unsupervised clustering with memory replay than as representation learning; its low accuracy on harder datasets like SSv2 hints at the ceiling imposed by the pretrained features.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an unsupervised video continual learning (uVCL) setting in which neither task boundaries nor class labels are available, and introduces uVCL-KDE / uVCL-KDE-RBF, a non-parametric method that clusters frozen video features via mean-shift Kernel Density Estimation, stores per-cluster feature exemplars for replay, and uses novelty thresholds to create clusters dynamically. Experiments on UCF101, HMDB51, and Something-Something V2 report high cluster accuracy for the proposed method compared with iCaRL, iCaRL+CL, EWC, and MAS adapted from vCLIMB. The abstract claims that the proposed methodology substantially enhances performance when successively learning many tasks.

Significance. If the reported gains were attributable to the proposed clustering and novelty-detection mechanism, this would be a useful contribution to a relatively unexplored problem: it provides a benchmark protocol, a memory-efficient feature-replay strategy, and a non-parametric way to grow clusters without labels or task boundaries. The paper also ships an unusual amount of experimental detail (forgetting metrics, memory-size ablations, threshold sensitivity, t-SNE visualizations). However, the central empirical claim is currently not established because the proposed method and the baselines are compared under different feature-extraction regimes: the proposed method uses a frozen VideoMAE V2 transformer pretrained on Kinetics-700, while the baselines use a TSN/ResNet-34 backbone that is trained and updated during continual learning. The performance gap may therefore reflect the quality of the frozen features rather than the KDE-based clustering, replay, or novelty detection. The paper's stated contribution would be credible only after same-feature, same-memory-budget comparisons with simpler clustering baselines (e.g., K-means or nearest-prototype) are added.

major comments (4)
  1. [§5.1, Table 1, Appendix C] The headline comparison is confounded. The proposed method extracts features with a frozen VideoMAE V2 (1024-d, pretrained on Kinetics-700) and never updates the representation, while all baselines are adapted from vCLIMB using TSN with ResNet-34 that is trained/updated during continual learning. Thus the gap (e.g., CAcc 93.45 vs. 10.23 on UCF101) cannot be attributed to the KDE clustering, novelty detection, or replay mechanism. To support the central claim, the authors must add baselines that use the same frozen VideoMAE V2 features and the same memory/replay budget, varying only the assignment/clustering mechanism (e.g., K-means, agglomerative clustering, nearest-prototype). Without such a control, the abstract's claim of 'substantially enhances' is unproven.
  2. [§5.2, Tables 1–3] The hyperparameters h (mean-shift bandwidth) and Θ2 (novelty threshold) are selected per dataset by evaluating on the same datasets used for the final reported results. For example, §5.2 states 'the best results are obtained for Θ2 = 0.3' and h is tuned among {15,...,19}; Table 3 further tunes Θ2. This makes the reported numbers fitted optima rather than predictive evaluations. The paper should either use a held-out validation split for hyperparameter selection or report performance across the full grid and the associated variability. At minimum, error bars over the three splits should be reported; currently only averages are given, and for SSv2 only the first 30 tasks are evaluated despite the protocol describing 659 tasks.
  3. [Appendix A and Appendix C] Memory content is not matched between the proposed method and the baselines. The proposed method stores only embedded features (1024-d vectors) in FIFO buffers, whereas the baselines, as adapted from vCLIMB, store video data with a much larger memory footprint, and Appendix C notes the baselines can retain up to 100% of training data. This difference in memory representation and management can affect forgetting behavior independently of the clustering method. The comparison should hold memory budget and memory content (features vs. raw videos) fixed, or justify why storing features is a fair and realistic baseline condition.
  4. [Eq. (6)–(7), §5.3] The novelty detection thresholds are load-bearing for cluster growth. Θ1 is estimated as the maximum distance between cluster centers from the first task, and Θ2 is a softmax confidence threshold. The ablation varies Θ2 but does not vary Θ1, and no analysis is given of how sensitive the final CAcc is to the first-task estimate of Θ1 or to the choice of distance metric. Since the method's ability to 'dynamically expand memory clusters' is a core contribution, this sensitivity should be quantified. If performance collapses for reasonable variations in Θ1, the robustness claim in the conclusion is overstated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (2)] The mean-shift update formula appears malformed: the Gaussian term in the numerator should involve exp(-||µ_t^j - x_i||^2 / (2h^2)), but the displayed equation has a stray minus sign on x_i and an ambiguous exponent. Please correct the notation.
  2. [Appendix D, Eq. (9)] The definition of Forward Forgetting is unusual: it averages (CAcc_{j-1} - CAcc_j), which measures degradation from the immediately preceding task, not the influence on all future tasks. The verbal description ('decreases the performance on previous task k-1') corresponds more naturally to backward forgetting. Please align the metric definition with the standard GEM definition or clarify the intended semantics.
  3. [Throughout] There are several typos and inconsistencies: 'Backword' for backward, 'RestNet' in Table 5, 'SSv1' in the Section 5.2 header, 'assued' in Section 5.2, and inconsistent naming uVCL-KDE vs. uVCIL-KDE in Appendix F. Please proofread.
  4. [Appendix C] The baseline description says 'each task introduces new 128 clusters' but the task sizes are 256 videos, which is internally inconsistent. Also, the baselines are re-implemented, but no code or detailed hyperparameters are provided; this limits reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation found; the method is an empirical clustering pipeline with no self-referential or self-citation-loaded claims.

full rationale

The paper makes no first-principles predictive derivation. Its pipeline is: frozen VideoMAE V2 features, KDE/mean-shift clustering, a novelty heuristic, memory replay, and (for uVCL-KDE-RBF) a linear classifier trained on cluster pseudo-labels. Evaluation uses external ground-truth labels only through Hungarian matching for cluster accuracy. No load-bearing step is justified by a self-citation: the authors' own prior work [2,3,22,54,55] is cited for standard techniques (KDE bandwidth estimation, RBF networks, video class-incremental learning) and is not used to forbid alternatives or to define the output. Hyperparameters h and Θ2 are explicitly tuned on the evaluation datasets (Section 5.2 and Table 1), which is an evaluation/selection-bias concern rather than circularity: the paper does not present those numbers as predictions under fixed a-priori hyperparameters. The fact that baselines use TSN/ResNet-34 features while the proposed method uses frozen VideoMAE V2 features is a confounding factor for the empirical comparison, but that is an experimental-design issue, not a circular derivation. Under the rules requiring a quoted equation or fitted-parameter-renamed-as-prediction, no specific circular step can be exhibited, so the circularity score is 0.

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

The method has no new physical or conceptual entities; all invented structure is algorithmic. The central claim depends on the discriminative power of the frozen VideoMAE V2 features and on the choice of bandwidth and novelty thresholds, which are tuned on the same benchmark.

free parameters (4)
  • Mean-shift bandwidth h = 17 (UCF101, SSv2), 19 (HMDB51)
    Tuned to maximize CAcc on the same datasets (Section 5.2).
  • Novelty threshold Θ2 = 0.3
    Selected via ablation for best CAcc on UCF101 and HMDB51 (Table 3).
  • Novelty threshold Θ1 = 16.53 (UCF101), 16.92 (HMDB51), 15.98 (SSv2)
    Computed from first-task data as the max distance between cluster centers; dataset-dependent (Section 5.3).
  • Memory buffer size N = 20 videos per cluster
    Chosen to match prior work [45]; ablation with 10 and 30 shows mixed effects (Section 5.3).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption VideoMAE V2, pretrained on Kinetics-700, provides a feature space where semantic video categories form separable clusters without any label supervision.
    The entire method operates on frozen features from this network (Section 4.1); if the features are not discriminative, the clustering cannot work.
  • domain assumption Mean-shift peaks in the KDE correspond to meaningful semantic categories and the bandwidth h can be chosen to produce a near-ground-truth number of clusters.
    The method assumes the peaks found by mean-shift align with video categories (Section 4.2).
  • domain assumption Exemplar features stored in memory buffers sufficiently represent the past tasks and replay prevents catastrophic forgetting.
    The method relies on storing 20 features per cluster and rerunning clustering on the buffer (Section 4.2, Appendix A).
  • standard math Standard properties of kernel density estimation and mean-shift convergence.
    Equation (1) and (2) rely on standard KDE and mean-shift theory from [3,7,8].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Unsupervised Video Continual Learning via Non-Parametric Deep Embedded Clustering." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2TSMNHJ7

@misc{pith2026250821773,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Unsupervised Video Continual Learning via Non-Parametric Deep Embedded Clustering},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2TSMNHJ7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21773}
}
read the original abstract

We propose a realistic scenario for the unsupervised video learning where neither task boundaries nor labels are provided when learning a succession of tasks. We also provide a non-parametric learning solution for the under-explored problem of unsupervised video continual learning. Videos represent a complex and rich spatio-temporal media information, widely used in many applications, but which have not been sufficiently explored in unsupervised continual learning. Prior studies have only focused on supervised continual learning, relying on the knowledge of labels and task boundaries, while having labeled data is costly and not practical. To address this gap, we study the unsupervised video continual learning (uVCL). uVCL raises more challenges due to the additional computational and memory requirements of processing videos when compared to images. We introduce a general benchmark experimental protocol for uVCL by considering the learning of unstructured video data categories during each task. We propose to use the Kernel Density Estimation (KDE) of deep embedded video features extracted by unsupervised video transformer networks as a non-parametric probabilistic representation of the data. We introduce a novelty detection criterion for the incoming new task data, dynamically enabling the expansion of memory clusters, aiming to capture new knowledge when learning a succession of tasks. We leverage the use of transfer learning from the previous tasks as an initial state for the knowledge transfer to the current learning task. We found that the proposed methodology substantially enhances the performance of the model when successively learning many tasks. We perform in-depth evaluations on three standard video action recognition datasets, including UCF101, HMDB51, and Something-to-Something V2, without using any labels or class boundaries.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.21773 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of the proposed unsupervised video continual learning based on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. uVCL results on UCF101, HMDB51 and SSv2 considering the first fold data. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The evaluation of the Backword Forgetting (BWF) from Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: We visualize the latent space stored in the memory for each cluster after learning [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Memory Aware Synapses: Learning what (not) to forget

    Rahaf Aljundi, Francesca Babiloni, Mohamed Elhoseiny, Marcus Rohrbach, and Tinne Tuytelaars. Memory Aware Synapses: Learning what (not) to forget. In Proc. of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), vol. LNCS 11207 , pages 139–154, 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Minimal topology for a radial basis functions neural network for pattern classification

    Adrian G Bors and Moncef Gabbouj. Minimal topology for a radial basis functions neural network for pattern classification. Digital Signal Processing , 4(3):173–188, 1994

    work page 1994

  3. [3]

    Bors and Nikolaos Nasios

    Adrian G. Bors and Nikolaos Nasios. Kernel bandwidth estimation for nonparametric modeling. IEEE Transactions on Sysmtes, Man, and Cybernetics- Part B Cybernetics , 39(6):1543–1555, 2009

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Deep cluster- ing for unsupervised learning of visual features

    Mathilde Caron, Piotr Bojanowski, Armand Joulin, and Matthijs Douze. Deep cluster- ing for unsupervised learning of visual features. In Proc. of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), vol. LNCS 11218 , pages 132–149, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Modeling the background for incremental learning in semantic segmentation

    Fabio Cermelli, Massimiliano Mancini, Samuel Rota Bulo, Elisa Ricci, and Barbara Caputo. Modeling the background for incremental learning in semantic segmentation. In Proc. of IEEE/CVF Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 9233–9242, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Cucl: Codebook for unsupervised continual learning

    Chen Cheng, Jingkuan Song, Xiaosu Zhu, Junchen Zhu, Lianli Gao, and Hengtao Shen. Cucl: Codebook for unsupervised continual learning. In Proc. of ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages 1729–1737, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Mean shift, mode seeking, and clustering

    Yizong Cheng. Mean shift, mode seeking, and clustering. IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 17(8):790–799, 1995

    work page 1995

  8. [8]

    Mean shift: a robust approach toward feature space analysis

    Dorin Comaniciu and Peter Meer. Mean shift: a robust approach toward feature space analysis. IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 24(5):603–619, 2002

    work page 2002

Show all 58 references
  1. [9]

    Unsupervised domain adaptation for video transformers in action recognition

    Victor G Turrisi Da Costa, Giacomo Zara, Paolo Rota, Thiago Oliveira-Santos, Nicu Sebe, Vittorio Murino, and Elisa Ricci. Unsupervised domain adaptation for video transformers in action recognition. In 2022 26th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), pages 125...

    2022

  2. [10]

    PODNet: Pooled outputs distillation for small-tasks incremental learning

    Arthur Douillard, Matthieu Cord, Charles Ollion, Thomas Robert, and Eduardo Valle. PODNet: Pooled outputs distillation for small-tasks incremental learning. In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). vol. LNCS 12365 , pages 86–102, 2020

    2020

  3. [11]

    something something

    Raghav Goyal, Samira Ebrahimi Kahou, Vincent Michalski, Joanna Materzynska, Su- sanne Westphal, Heuna Kim, Valentin Haenel, Ingo Fruend, Peter Yianilos, Moritz Mueller-Freitag, Florian Hoppe, Christian Thurau, Ingo Bax, and Roland Memisevic. The “something something” video dat...

    2017

  4. [12]

    Dual alignment un- supervised domain adaptation for video-text retrieval

    Xiaoshuai Hao, Wanqian Zhang, Dayan Wu, Fei Zhu, and Bo Li. Dual alignment un- supervised domain adaptation for video-text retrieval. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 18962–18972, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Unsupervised continual learning via pseudo la- bels

    Jiangpeng He and Fengqing Zhu. Unsupervised continual learning via pseudo la- bels. In International Workshop on Continual Semi-Supervised Learning, pages 15–32. Springer, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 770–778, 2016

    2016

  7. [15]

    Compacting, picking and growing for unforgetting continual learning

    Ching-Yi Hung, Cheng-Hao Tu, Cheng-En Wu, Chien-Hung Chen, Yi-Ming Chan, and Chu-Song Chen. Compacting, picking and growing for unforgetting continual learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , pages 13647–13657, 2019

    2019

  8. [16]

    The kinetics human action video dataset

    Will Kay, Joao Carreira, Karen Simonyan, Brian Zhang, Chloe Hillier, Sudheendra Vi- jayanarasimhan, Fabio Viola, Tim Green, Trevor Back, Paul Natsev, et al. The kinetics human action video dataset. arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.06950, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization

    Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks

    James Kirkpatrick, Razvan Pascanu, Neil Rabinowitz, Joel Veness, Guillaume Des- jardins, Andrei A Rusu, Kieran Milan, John Quan, Tiago Ramalho, Agnieszka Grabska-Barwinska, et al. Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networks. Proc. of the national academy of sciences ...

    2017

  11. [19]

    Trust-region adaptive frequency for online continual learning

    Yajing Kong, Liu Liu, Maoying Qiao, Zhen Wang, and Dacheng Tao. Trust-region adaptive frequency for online continual learning. International Journal of Computer Vision, 131(7):1825–1839, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Hmdb: a large video database for human motion recognition

    Hildegard Kuehne, Hueihan Jhuang, Estíbaliz Garrote, Tomaso Poggio, and Thomas Serre. Hmdb: a large video database for human motion recognition. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 2556–2563, 2011

    2011

  13. [21]

    The hungarian method for the assignment problem

    Harold W Kuhn. The hungarian method for the assignment problem. Naval research logistics quarterly, 2(1-2):83–97, 1955

    1955

  14. [22]

    Nattapong Kurpukdee and Adrian G. Bors. Temporal transformer encoder for video class incremental learning. In Proc. of the IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pages 1295–1301, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Do we really need to access the source data? source hypothesis transfer for unsupervised domain adaptation

    Jian Liang, Dapeng Hu, and Jiashi Feng. Do we really need to access the source data? source hypothesis transfer for unsupervised domain adaptation. In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) , pages 6028–6039. PMLR 119, 2020

    2020

  16. [24]

    Prototype-guided continual adaptation for class-incremental unsuper- vised domain adaptation

    Hongbin Lin, Yifan Zhang, Zhen Qiu, Shuaicheng Niu, Chuang Gan, Yanxia Liu, and Mingkui Tan. Prototype-guided continual adaptation for class-incremental unsuper- vised domain adaptation. In European Conference on Computer Vision , pages 351–

  17. [25]

    Focal loss for dense object detection

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Priya Goyal, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, and Piotr Dollár. Focal loss for dense object detection. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intel- ligence, 42(2):318–327, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    Gradient episodic memory for continual learning

    David Lopez-Paz and Marc’Aurelio Ranzato. Gradient episodic memory for continual learning. Advances in neural information processing systems , 30, 2017

    2017

  19. [27]

    Class in- cremental learning for video action classification

    Jiawei Ma, Xiaoyu Tao, Jianxing Ma, Xiaopeng Hong, and Yihong Gong. Class in- cremental learning for video action classification. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Image Processing (ICIP), pages 504–508, 2021

    2021

  20. [28]

    Visualizing data using t-sne

    Laurens van der Maaten and Geoffrey Hinton. Visualizing data using t-sne. Journal of machine learning research, 9(Nov):2579–2605, 2008

    2008

  21. [29]

    Representational continuity for unsupervised continual learning

    Divyam Madaan, Jaehong Yoon, Yuanchun Li, Yunxin Liu, and Sung Ju Hwang. Representational continuity for unsupervised continual learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.06976, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Class-incremental learning on video-based action recognition by distillation of various knowledge

    Vali Ollah Maraghi, Karim Faez, et al. Class-incremental learning on video-based action recognition by distillation of various knowledge. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Class-incremental learning: survey and performance evalua- tion on image classification.IEEE Trans

    Marc Masana, Xialei Liu, Bartłomiej Twardowski, Mikel Menta, Andrew D Bagdanov, and Joost van de Weijer. Class-incremental learning: survey and performance evalua- tion on image classification.IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(5):5513–5533, 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    Class-incremental learning for action recognition in videos

    Jaeyoo Park, Minsoo Kang, and Bohyung Han. Class-incremental learning for action recognition in videos. In Proc. IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion (ICCV), pages 13678–13687, 2021

    2021

  25. [33]

    Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library.Advances in neural infor- mation processing systems, 32, 2019

    Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, et al. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library.Advances in neural infor- mation processing systems, 32, 2019

    2019

  26. [34]

    Pedregosa, G

    F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V . Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blon- del, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V . Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Lear...

    2011

  27. [35]

    Learning a condensed frame for memory-efficient video class-incremental learning

    Yixuan Pei, Zhiwu Qing, Jun Cen, Xiang Wang, Shiwei Zhang, Yaxiong Wang, Mingqian Tang, Nong Sang, and Xueming Qian. Learning a condensed frame for memory-efficient video class-incremental learning. In Advances in Neural Infor . Proc. Systems (NeurIPS), pages 31002–31016, 2022

    2022

  28. [36]

    Space-time prompting for video class-incremental learning

    Yixuan Pei, Zhiwu Qing, Shiwei Zhang, Xiang Wang, Yingya Zhang, Deli Zhao, and Xueming Qian. Space-time prompting for video class-incremental learning. In Proc. of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 11932–11942, 2023. 14 KURPUKDEE AND BORS: UNSUPE...

    2023

  29. [37]

    Continual unsupervised representation learning

    Dushyant Rao, Francesco Visin, Andrei Rusu, Razvan Pascanu, Yee Whye Teh, and Raia Hadsell. Continual unsupervised representation learning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 32, 2019

    2019

  30. [38]

    Lam- pert

    Sylvestre-Alvise Rebuffi, Alexander Kolesnikov, Georg Sperl, and Christoph H. Lam- pert. iCaRL: Incremental classifier and representation learning. In Proc. IEEE Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 5533–5542, 2017

    2017

  31. [39]

    Unsupervised video domain adaptation with masked pre-training and col- laborative self-training

    Arun Reddy, William Paul, Corban Rivera, Ketul Shah, Celso M de Melo, and Rama Chellappa. Unsupervised video domain adaptation with masked pre-training and col- laborative self-training. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, page...

    2024

  32. [40]

    Continual learning with deep generative replay

    Hanul Shin, Jung Kwon Lee, Jaehong Kim, and Jiwon Kim. Continual learning with deep generative replay. Advances in neural information processing systems , 30, 2017

    2017

  33. [41]

    UCF101: A dataset of 101 human actions classes from videos in the wild

    Khurram Soomro, Amir Roshan Zamir, and Mubarak Shah. UCF101: A dataset of 101 human actions classes from videos in the wild. arXiv preprint arXiv:1212.0402, 2012

    2012 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Unsu- pervised continual learning for gradually varying domains

    Abu Md Niamul Taufique, Chowdhury Sadman Jahan, and Andreas Savakis. Unsu- pervised continual learning for gradually varying domains. In Proc. of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 3740–3750, 2022

    2022

  35. [43]

    Scan: Learning to classify images without labels

    Wouter Van Gansbeke, Simon Vandenhende, Stamatios Georgoulis, Marc Proesmans, and Luc Van Gool. Scan: Learning to classify images without labels. In European conference on computer vision, pages 268–285. Springer, 2020

    2020

  36. [44]

    PIVOT: prompting for video continual learning

    Andrés Villa, Juan León Alcázar, Motasem Alfarra, Kumail Alhamoud, Julio Hurtado, Fabian Caba Heilbron, Alvaro Soto, and Bernard Ghanem. PIVOT: prompting for video continual learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), ...

    2023

  37. [45]

    vCLIMB: A novel video class incremental learning benchmark

    Andrés Villa, Kumail Alhamoud, Victor Escorcia, Fabian Caba Heilbron, Juan León Alcázar, and Bernard Ghanem. vCLIMB: A novel video class incremental learning benchmark. In Proc. IEEE/CVF Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog. (CVPR), pages 19013–19022, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    Temporal segment networks for action recognition in videos

    Limin Wang, Yuanjun Xiong, Zhe Wang, Yu Qiao, Dahua Lin, Xiaoou Tang, and Luc Van Gool. Temporal segment networks for action recognition in videos. IEEE Trans- actions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 41(11):2740–2755, 2019

    2019

  39. [47]

    Videomae v2: Scaling video masked autoencoders with dual masking

    Limin Wang, Bingkun Huang, Zhiyu Zhao, Zhan Tong, Yinan He, Yi Wang, Yali Wang, and Yu Qiao. Videomae v2: Scaling video masked autoencoders with dual masking. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition, pages 14549–14560, 2023

    2023

  40. [48]

    Learning to prompt for contin- ual learning

    Zifeng Wang, Zizhao Zhang, Chen-Yu Lee, Han Zhang, Ruoxi Sun, Xiaoqi Ren, Guo- long Su, Vincent Perot, Jennifer Dy, and Tomas Pfister. Learning to prompt for contin- ual learning. In Proc. of the IEEE/CVF Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition (CVPR), pages 139–149...

    2022

  41. [49]

    Class-incremental unsupervised domain adaptation via pseudo-label distillation

    Kun Wei, Xu Yang, Zhe Xu, and Cheng Deng. Class-incremental unsupervised domain adaptation via pseudo-label distillation. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , 33 (1):1188–1198, 2024

    2024

  42. [50]

    Class-incremental learning with strong pre-trained models

    Tz-Ying Wu, Gurumurthy Swaminathan, Zhizhong Li, Avinash Ravichandran, Nuno Vasconcelos, Rahul Bhotika, and Stefano Soatto. Class-incremental learning with strong pre-trained models. In Proc. of IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 9591–...

    2022

  43. [51]

    Large scale incremental learning

    Yue Wu, Yinpeng Chen, Lijuan Wang, Yuancheng Ye, Zicheng Liu, Yandong Guo, and Yun Fu. Large scale incremental learning. In Proc. IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 374–382, 2019

    2019

  44. [52]

    Unsupervised feature learn- ing via non-parametric instance discrimination

    Zhirong Wu, Yuanjun Xiong, Stella X Yu, and Dahua Lin. Unsupervised feature learn- ing via non-parametric instance discrimination. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 3733–3742, 2018

    2018

  45. [53]

    Unsupervised deep embedding for clus- tering analysis

    Junyuan Xie, Ross Girshick, and Ali Farhadi. Unsupervised deep embedding for clus- tering analysis. In International conference on machine learning , pages 478–487. PMLR 48, 2016

    2016

  46. [54]

    Fei Ye and Adrian G. Bors. Lifelong teacher-student network learning. IEEE Transac- tions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 44(10):6280–6296, 2022

    2022

  47. [55]

    Fei Ye and Adrian G. Bors. Lifelong generative adversarial autoencoder. IEEE Trans- actions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , 35(10):14684–14698, 2024

    2024

  48. [56]

    Unsupervised learning from video with deep neural embeddings

    Chengxu Zhuang, Tianwei She, Alex Andonian, Max Sobol Mark, and Daniel Yamins. Unsupervised learning from video with deep neural embeddings. In Proc. of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 9563–9572, 2020. 1 Appendix A - Memory man...

    2020

  49. [58]

    The temporal data augmentation, as proposed in [46], is also applied

    with a ResNet-34 backbone. The temporal data augmentation, as proposed in [46], is also applied. The mean-shift clustering with a Gaussian kernel is used to assign pseudo- labels. When considering the baselines, we preserve the same ratio of videos per class as in [38, 45], wh...

  50. [368]

    KURPUKDEE AND BORS: UNSUPERVISED VIDEO CONTINUAL LEARNING 13

    Springer, 2022. KURPUKDEE AND BORS: UNSUPERVISED VIDEO CONTINUAL LEARNING 13

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.