T-CIL: Temperature Scaling using Adversarial Perturbation for Calibration in Class-Incremental Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study model confidence calibration in class-incremental learning, where models learn from sequential tasks with different class sets. While existing works primarily focus on accuracy, maintaining calibrated confidence has been largely overlooked. Unfortunately, most post-hoc calibration techniques are not designed to work with the limited memories of old-task data typical in class-incremental learning, as retaining a sufficient validation set would be impractical. Thus, we propose T-CIL, a novel temperature scaling approach for class-incremental learning without a validation set for old tasks, that leverages adversarially perturbed exemplars from memory. Directly using exemplars is inadequate for temperature optimization, since they are already used for training. The key idea of T-CIL is to perturb exemplars more strongly for old tasks than for the new task by adjusting the perturbation direction based on feature distance, with the single magnitude determined using the new-task validation set. This strategy makes the perturbation magnitude computed from the new task also applicable to old tasks, leveraging the tendency that the accuracy of old tasks is lower than that of the new task. We empirically show that T-CIL significantly outperforms various baselines in terms of calibration on real datasets and can be integrated with existing class-incremental learning techniques with minimal impact on 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 | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".