arXiv Machine Learning

What to Preserve, Where to Adapt: A Depth-Wise Analysis of Forgetting in Continual Gynecological Image Segmentation

arXiv:2608. 13660v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical image segmentation models are typically trained under the assumption that all data are available simultaneously.

arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 5

MedCRP-CL: Continual Medical Image Segmentation via Bayesian Nonparametric Semantic Modality Discovery

arXiv:2605. 20297v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Medical image segmentation faces a fundamental challenge in continual learning: data arrives sequentially from heterogeneous sources, yet effective continual learning requires discovering which tasks share sufficient structure to benefit from joint learning.

By Ziyuan Gao
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 16

To forget is to preserve: Machine Unlearning for 3D medical image segmentation

arXiv:2606. 16180v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: With new data privacy laws such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) [1] that allow individuals to ask that any of their personal information be erased from trained machine learning models, there has been a push to investigate the unlearning of data from models as a way to comply with these laws.

By Nitesh Kumar Singh, Akhilesh Singh, Arjun Arora
arXiv AI
Sep 1

On the Plasticity Collapse in Continual Machine Unlearning

The paper investigates continual machine unlearning, where models must forget data over time. It identifies a fundamental issue called plasticity collapse, where successive unlearning requests cause geometric constraints that saturate parameter space, leading to two failure modes: forward failure (reduced forgetting quality) and backward failure (re‑memorization). Experiments across architectures and datasets confirm that plasticity collapse is a pervasive problem in continual unlearning.

By Yingdan Shi, Xiang Xu, Kaize Ding, Alfred O. Hero, Ren Wang
arXiv AI
Aug 20

Forgetting, plasticity, and co-observation: a third facet of continual learning

The paper argues that catastrophic forgetting and loss of plasticity alone cannot explain why naive sequential training underperforms offline joint training. It introduces data co-observation as a third factor, showing that observing training data together consistently improves performance across supervised and self-supervised settings. The study also reinterprets common continual learning methods, suggesting that memory replay’s success stems from restoring co-observation benefits rather than merely mitigating forgetting.

By Timm Hess, Abhishek Jha, Gido M. van de Ven, Tinne Tuytelaars
arXiv AI
2d ago

Local Support Learning

arXiv:2610.02126v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We explore catastrophic forgetting in the context of large pre-trained models. By considering forgetting as a geometric problem in the input space of...

By Assaf Ben-Kish, Akarsh Kumar, James Glass, Raja Giryes