MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415048913 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2025.3619883

Release the Potential of Memory Buffer in Continual Learning: A Dynamic System Perspective

2025· article· en· W4415048913 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenyi Wang, Li Shen, Tiehang Duan, Yanjun Zhu, Tongliang Liu, Mingchen Gao, Dacheng Tao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReinforcement Learning in Robotics
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForgettingOverfittingMemory modelMemory managementDynamic random-access memoryTransformation (genetics)Adaptive memoryPerspective (graphical)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continual learning (CL) focuses on learning non-stationary data distribution without forgetting previous knowledge. The most widely used memory-replay approaches are often prone to memory overfitting due to the limited memory diversity and hardness. Existing work mitigating memory overfitting either lacks data diversity or hardness or is hard to train. To address the above limitations and release the memory buffer potential, we view the memory buffer transformation from a new dynamic system perspective and propose a continuous and reversible memory transformation method. We introduce an adversarial optimization objective that jointly learns the CL model and memory transformer. Specifically, we present a deterministic continuous memory transformer (DCMT) to generate diverse memory data. Furthermore, we inject uncertainty into the transformation function and develop a stochastic continuous memory transformer (SCMT), which substantially enhances the diversity of the transformed memory buffer. The presented neural transformation approaches have significant advantages over existing ones: (1) they significantly increase the memory buffer diversity and hardness to overfit; (2) they are memory efficient without needing to make a replica of the memory data. Extensive experiments show a significant improvement with our approach compared to strong baselines.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicReinforcement Learning in RoboticsFrench-language works237,207