mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

A Step Towards Forgetting: Optimiser History and the Loss of Answer Mass

arXiv 2610.03940 ↗First posted 2 Oct 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

During fine-tuning, a language model can assign less probability to previously learned answers even when the current gradient acts to preserve that probability. With momentum, each update also carries gradients computed at earlier model states, and these stored contributions can push the model in the opposite direction. We investigate how this optimiser memory contributes to forgetting by separating old-task loss into confusion among its answers and leakage of probability outside the answer set. Across three language-model families, answer mass consistently declines while discrimination among old answers usually improves: the model becomes less likely to produce answers that it can still distinguish correctly. Decomposing Adam updates reveals opposing contributions to this loss of answer mass. Over training, accumulated history favours leakage, while the current gradient opposes it. Resolving history by age shows that the harmful contributions come mainly from older gradients of the new task, whereas recent gradients tend to protect the old answers. Changes in history's effect are dominated by its orientation relative to the old-task gradient. Interventions that reset momentum while matching the initial update norm establish that stored history affects retention, with state-dependent immediate effects and lower final old-task loss over longer Adam continuations, mainly through recovered answer mass. Finally, integration along finite updates shows that most sampled large loss increases are captured by local projections, while curvature along history amplifies some events. Together, these findings reveal how an optimiser's memory can erode learned behaviour even as its current gradient acts to preserve it.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2026.

Builds on

21 of 23 references.

References · 21

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
  2. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  3. 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,787
  4. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  5. 2016Learning without Forgettingcited by 2,496
  6. 2015Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classificationcited by 2,330
  7. 2017Gradient Episodic Memory for Continual Learningcited by 1,898
  8. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
  9. 2019Similarity of Neural Network Representations Revisitedcited by 1,755
  10. 2020Gradient Surgery for Multi-Task Learningcited by 1,256
  11. 2022Fine-Tuning can Distort Pretrained Features and Underperform Out-of-Distributioncited by 739
  12. 2019Large Scale Incremental Learningcited by 732
9 more
  1. 2024OLMo: Accelerating the Science of Language Modelscited by 613
  2. 2021Gradient Descent on Neural Networks Typically Occurs at the Edge of Stabilitycited by 427
  3. 2019Orthogonal Gradient Descent for Continual Learningcited by 369
  4. 2025SmolLM2: When Smol Goes Big -- Data-Centric Training of a Small Language Modelcited by 335
  5. 2024Revisiting Catastrophic Forgetting in Large Language Model Tuningcited by 99
  6. 2024The AdEMAMix Optimizer: Better, Faster, Oldercited by 54
  7. 2024Cautious Optimizers: Improving Training with One Line of Codecited by 47
  8. 2024MoFO: Momentum-Filtered Optimizer for Mitigating Forgetting in LLM Fine-Tuningcited by 14
  9. 2025How Weight Resampling and Optimizers Shape the Dynamics of Continual Learning and Forgetting in Neural Networkscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.