mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Continual learning with the neural tangent ensemble

arXiv 2408.17394 ↗First posted 30 Aug 2024cs.LG cs.NEcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

A natural strategy for continual learning is to weigh a Bayesian ensemble of fixed functions. This suggests that if a (single) neural network could be interpreted as an ensemble, one could design effective algorithms that learn without forgetting. To realize this possibility, we observe that a neural network classifier with N parameters can be interpreted as a weighted ensemble of N classifiers, and that in the lazy regime limit these classifiers are fixed throughout learning. We call these classifiers the neural tangent experts and show they output valid probability distributions over the labels. We then derive the likelihood and posterior probability of each expert given past data. Surprisingly, the posterior updates for these experts are equivalent to a scaled and projected form of stochastic gradient descent (SGD) over the network weights. Away from the lazy regime, networks can be seen as ensembles of adaptive experts which improve over time. These results offer a new interpretation of neural networks as Bayesian ensembles of experts, providing a principled framework for understanding and mitigating catastrophic forgetting in continual learning settings.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Aug 2024.

Builds on

26 of 53 references.

References · 26

  1. 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,718
  2. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  3. 2017Outrageously Large Neural Networks: The Sparsely-Gated Mixture-of-Experts Layercited by 3,413
  4. 2018Neural Tangent Kernel: Convergence and Generalization in Neural Networkscited by 2,597
  5. 2013An Empirical Investigation of Catastrophic Forgetting in Gradient-Based Neural Networkscited by 711
  6. 2018On Lazy Training in Differentiable Programmingcited by 671
  7. 2022Mixture-of-Experts with Expert Choice Routingcited by 611
  8. 2017Variational Continual Learningcited by 335
  9. 2018Online Structured Laplace Approximations For Overcoming Catastrophic Forgettingcited by 197
  10. 2020Understanding the Role of Training Regimes in Continual Learningcited by 177
  11. 2017A Bayesian Perspective on Generalization and Stochastic Gradient Descentcited by 134
  12. 2020On the linearity of large non-linear models: when and why the tangent kernel is constantcited by 129
14 more
  1. 2021Repulsive Deep Ensembles are Bayesiancited by 103
  2. 2019Uncertainty-guided Continual Learning with Bayesian Neural Networkscited by 100
  3. 2020Bayesian Deep Ensembles via the Neural Tangent Kernelcited by 90
  4. 2021Wide Neural Networks Forget Less Catastrophicallycited by 64
  5. 2023Lifelong Language Pretraining with Distribution-Specialized Expertscited by 64
  6. 2019A Unifying Bayesian View of Continual Learningcited by 38
  7. 2019MMD-Bayes: Robust Bayesian Estimation via Maximum Mean Discrepancycited by 35
  8. 2021Diversity and Generalization in Neural Network Ensemblescited by 32
  9. 2021How do Quadratic Regularizers Prevent Catastrophic Forgetting: The Role of Interpolationcited by 19
  10. 2021Encoders and Ensembles for Task-Free Continual Learningcited by 17
  11. 2017Analysis of dropout learning regarded as ensemble learningcited by 15
  12. 2021Does the Adam Optimizer Exacerbate Catastrophic Forgetting?cited by 5
  13. 2022Self-Activating Neural Ensembles for Continual Reinforcement Learningcited by 5
  14. 2022Neural Architecture for Online Ensemble Continual Learningcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

4 papers.