Online Continual Learning with Maximally Interfered Retrieval

Authors: Rahaf Aljundi, Lucas Caccia, Eugene Belilovsky, Massimo Caccia, Laurent Charlin, Tinne Tuytelaars

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 1908.04742v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
Continual learning remains a significant challenge for modern machine learning systems. In particular, the online or "single-pass through the data" setting has recently gained attention as a natural and difficult setting to tackle. While methods based on replay, either generative or from stored memory, have shown to be effective approaches for continual learning and have matched or exceeded state-of-the-art benchmarks, they typically rely on randomly selecting samples from the replay memory or generative model which is suboptimal. Rahaf Aljundi et al. propose a controlled sampling of memories for replay by retrieving the samples that are most interfered with - those whose prediction will be most negatively impacted by foreseen parameter updates. They show a formulation for this sampling criterion in both the generative replay and experience replay settings, resulting in consistent gains in performance and greatly reduced forgetting. The authors' approach offers an improvement over existing methods and provides a promising direction for future research in continual learning.
AI-generated keywords: Continual Learning Single-Pass Replay Memory Generative Model Interference

AI-generated Key Points

  • Continual learning is a challenge for modern machine learning systems
  • The online or "single-pass through the data" setting is a difficult setting to tackle
  • Methods based on replay have shown to be effective approaches for continual learning and have matched or exceeded state-of-the-art benchmarks
  • Randomly selecting samples from the replay memory or generative model is suboptimal
  • Rahaf Aljundi et al. propose a controlled sampling of memories for replay by retrieving the samples that are most interfered with - those whose prediction will be most negatively impacted by foreseen parameter updates
  • They show a formulation for this sampling criterion in both the generative replay and experience replay settings, resulting in consistent gains in performance and greatly reduced forgetting
  • The authors' approach offers an improvement over existing methods
  • Provides a promising direction for future research in continual learning
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Abstract: Continual learning, the setting where a learning agent is faced with a never ending stream of data, continues to be a great challenge for modern machine learning systems. In particular the online or "single-pass through the data" setting has gained attention recently as a natural setting that is difficult to tackle. Methods based on replay, either generative or from a stored memory, have been shown to be effective approaches for continual learning, matching or exceeding the state of the art in a number of standard benchmarks. These approaches typically rely on randomly selecting samples from the replay memory or from a generative model, which is suboptimal. In this work we consider a controlled sampling of memories for replay. We retrieve the samples which are most interfered, i.e. whose prediction will be most negatively impacted by the foreseen parameters update. We show a formulation for this sampling criterion in both the generative replay and the experience replay setting, producing consistent gains in performance and greatly reduced forgetting.

Submitted to arXiv on 11 Aug. 2019

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.