Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training deep learning models from a stream of nonstationary data is a critical problem to be solved to achieve general artificial intelligence. As a promising solution, the continual learning (CL) technique aims to build intelligent systems that have the plasticity to learn from new information without forgetting the previously obtained knowledge. Unfortunately, existing CL methods face two nontrivial limitations. First, when updating a model with new data, existing CL methods usually constrain the model parameters within the vicinity of the parameters optimized for old data, limiting the exploration ability of the model; second, the important strength of each parameter (used to consolidate the previously learned knowledge) is fixed and thus is suboptimal for the dynamic parameter updates. To address these limitations, we first relax the vicinity constraints with a global definition of the important strength, which allows us to explore the full parameter space. Specifically, we define the important strength as the sensitivity of the global loss function to the model parameters. Moreover, we propose adjusting the important strength adaptively to align it with the dynamic parameter updates. Through extensive experiments on popular data sets, we demonstrate that our proposed method outperforms the strong baselines by up to 24% in terms of average accuracy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".