When Does Structure Matter in Continual Learning? Dimensionality Controls When Modularity Shapes Representational Geometry
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
To preserve previously learned representations, continual learning systems must strike a balance between plasticity, the ability to acquire new knowledge, and stability. This stability-plasticity dilemma affects how representations can be reused across tasks: shared structure enables transfer when tasks are similar but may also induce interference when new learning disrupts existing representations. However, it remains unclear when and why structural separation influences this trade-off. In this study, we examine how network architecture, task similarity, and representational dimensionality jointly shape learning in a sequential task paradigm inspired by transfer-interference studies. We compare a task-partitioned modular recurrent network with a single-module baseline by systematically varying task similarity (low, medium, high) and the scale of weight initialization, which induces different learning regimes that we empirically characterize through the effective dimensionality of the learned representations. We find that architecture has minimal impact in high-dimensional regimes where representations are sufficiently unconstrained to accommodate multiple tasks without strong interference. In contrast, in lower-dimensional (rich) regimes, architectural separation is decisive: modular networks exhibit graded alignment of task-specific subspaces with overlap for similar tasks, partial orthogonalization for moderately dissimilar tasks, and stronger separation for dissimilar tasks. This graded geometry is absent in the single network baseline. Our findings suggest that representational dimensionality acts as a key organizing variable governing when structural separation becomes functionally relevant, and highlight adaptive geometry as a central principle for designing continual learning systems.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Apr 2026.
Builds on
13 of 30 references.
References · 13
- 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,718
- 2018Experience Replay for Continual Learningcited by 1,074
- 2020Anatomy of Catastrophic Forgetting: Hidden Representations and Task Semanticscited by 158
- 2021Continual Learning in the Teacher-Student Setup: Impact of Task Similaritycited by 86
- 2024Disentangling and Mitigating the Impact of Task Similarity for Continual Learningcited by 19
- 2023How connectivity structure shapes rich and lazy learning in neural circuitscited by 15
- 2025Rethinking the Stability-Plasticity Trade-off in Continual Learning from an Architectural Perspectivecited by 14
- 2024Neural population geometry and optimal coding of tasks with shared latent structurecited by 9
- 2021Dynamics of specialization in neural modules under resource constraintscited by 6
- 2023Emergence and reconfiguration of modular structure for synaptic neural networks during continual familiarity detectioncited by 6
- 2024Adaptive Intelligence: leveraging insights from adaptive behavior in animals to build flexible AI systemscited by 5
- 2017Brain Modularity Mediates the Relation between Task Complexity and Performancecited by 3
1 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.