PreprintCited by 37Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningData Stream Mining TechniquesAdvanced Neural Network Applications

A Strategy for an Uncompromising Incremental Learner

Open access
Venkatesan, Ragav, Venkateswara, Hemanth, Panchanathan, Sethuraman, Li, Baoxin·2017·arXiv

Abstract

Multi-class supervised learning systems require the knowledge of the entire range of labels they predict. Often when learnt incrementally, they suffer from catastrophic forgetting. To avoid this, generous leeways have to be made to the philosophy of incremental learning that either forces a part of the machine to not learn, or to retrain the machine again with a selection of the historic data. While these hacks work to various degrees, they do not adhere to the spirit of incremental learning. In this article, we redefine incremental learning with stringent conditions that do not allow for any undesirable relaxations and assumptions. We design a strategy involving generative models and the distillation of dark knowledge as a means of hallucinating data along with appropriate targets from past distributions. We call this technique, phantom sampling.We show that phantom sampling helps avoid catastrophic forgetting during incremental learning. Using an implementation based on deep neural networks, we demonstrate that phantom sampling dramatically avoids catastrophic forgetting. We apply these strategies to competitive multi-class incremental learning of deep neural networks. Using various benchmark datasets and through our strategy, we demonstrate that strict incremental learning could be achieved. We further put our strategy to test on challenging cases, including cross-domain increments and incrementing on a novel label space. We also propose a trivial extension to unbounded-continual learning and identify potential for future development.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1705.00744

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Venkatesan, R., Venkateswara, H., Panchanathan, S., & Li, B.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2017
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2610828655
Cited by
37
References
29
Citations by year
2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Data Stream Mining Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
catastrophic forgetting, incremental learning, continual learning, multi-class classification, generative models, knowledge distillation, dark knowledge, hallucinations, cross-domain learning, deep neural network

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review