← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2611.04309 · v1
What Is the Influence of Task Order in Continual Learning? An Empirical Study and Order-Aware Evaluation for Motion Forecasting
首次提交 2026-11-03 12:39
版本更新 2026-11-03 12:39
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:40
摘要
Aggregate scores for continual learning algorithms rest on a distribution over task orders that is rarely stated. We formulate algorithm comparison as an expectation over a declared order distribution, which separates training variation from order variation, and apply it to motion forecasting with four road-layout tasks from the INTERACTION dataset, all 24 task orders, four algorithms, and three training replicates (288 runs). Task order accounts for 65\% to 91\% of the variation in current-task error and backward transfer, and 90\% to 99\% of this order effect comes from the identity of the starting task: the smallest task cannot be learned from a cold start. Beyond the first stage, the order effect is comparable to training variability. In most orders, the leading algorithm in current-task error and backward transfer is within one replicate standard deviation of the runner-up. Backward transfer depends on the order mainly through its reference term, which weights the first task most heavily, so relative improvement and final error identify different leading algorithms for displacement error. A transition-direction descriptor computed from task statistics tracks the position of the smallest task, and weighting orders by it leaves the algorithm ranking unchanged. These results call for benchmarks that declare their order distribution and report order-resolved, starting-task-resolved, warm-start, and final errors alongside aggregate scores. The code and data are available \href{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/task-order-cl-4f7b/}{here}.
作者备注：13 pages
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v1 · 2026-11-03 12:39 · 最新观测版本
What Is the Influence of Task Order in Continual Learning? An Empirical Study and Order-Aware Evaluation for Motion Forecasting
Aggregate scores for continual learning algorithms rest on a distribution over task orders that is rarely stated. We formulate algorithm comparison as an expectation over a declared order distribution, which separates training variation from order variation, and apply it to motion forecasting with four road-layout tasks from the INTERACTION dataset, all 24 task orders, four algorithms, and three training replicates (288 runs). Task order accounts for 65\% to 91\% of the variation in current-task error and backward transfer, and 90\% to 99\% of this order effect comes from the identity of the starting task: the smallest task cannot be learned from a cold start. Beyond the first stage, the order effect is comparable to training variability. In most orders, the leading algorithm in current-task error and backward transfer is within one replicate standard deviation of the runner-up. Backward transfer depends on the order mainly through its reference term, which weights the first task most heavily, so relative improvement and final error identify different leading algorithms for displacement error. A transition-direction descriptor computed from task statistics tracks the position of the smallest task, and weighting orders by it leaves the algorithm ranking unchanged. These results call for benchmarks that declare their order distribution and report order-resolved, starting-task-resolved, warm-start, and final errors alongside aggregate scores. The code and data are available \href{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/task-order-cl-4f7b/}{here}.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗