Continual Memory Neurons
Matteo Tiezzi, Simone Marullo, Federico Becattini, Stefano Melacci
OpenReview ground truth
TL;DR — A novel low-level approach to continual learning from a stream of data. A new neuron model that generalizes classic neurons, autonomously learning to address and merge internal memory units, better isolating computations and preserving information.
Abstract
Learning with neural networks by continuously processing a stream of data is very related to the way humans learn from perceptual information. However, when data is not i.i.d., it is largely known that it is very hard to find a good trade-off between plasticity and stability, frequently resulting in catastrophic forgetting issues. In this paper, to our best knowledge, we are the first to follow a significantly novel route, tackling the problem at the lowest level of abstraction. We propose a neuron model, referred to as Continual Memory Neuron (CMN), which does not only compute a response to an input pattern, but also diversifies computations to preserve what was previously learned, while being plastic enough to adapt to new knowledge. The values attached to weights are computed as a function of the neuron input, which acts as a query in a key-value map, with the goal of selecting and blending a set of learnable memory units. We show that this computational scheme is motivated by and strongly related to the ones of popular models that perform computations relying on a set of samples stored in a memory buffer, including Kernel Machines and Transformers. Experiments on class-and-domain incremental streams processed in online and single-pass manner support CMNs' capability to mitigate forgetting, while keeping competitive or better performance with respect to continual learning methods that explicitly store and replay data over time.
Author context
Most prolific author: 1 submissions (credibility 1.00).
No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 32 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 38% of matchups.
- ▼ lost to Bridging the gap between offline and onlin… ×4
- ▼ lost to Making Pre-trained Language Models Great o… ×4
- ▼ lost to Network Alignment with Transferable Graph … ×4
- ▼ lost to Structured Pruning Adapters ×4
- ▲ beat DeCCaF: Deferral Under Cost and Capacity C… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)