arXiv Machine Learning By Yikuan Li, Pinyan Lu, Fanghui Liu

Are Parameter-Efficient Fine-tuning Methods Really Different?

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

The paper investigates whether different parameter‑efficient fine‑tuning (PEFT) methods truly differ in their approach and impact. By comparing six methods on language and diffusion models, the authors find that many LoRA‑family techniques approximately preserve pretrained geometry, and that restoring slightly drifted singular‑value spectra largely maintains task performance, challenging the need for explicit geometric preservation. They also observe distinct adaptation–retention trade‑offs: LoRA limits forgetting best, DoRA scores higher on average, and PiSSA incurs more retention costs, with performance gains linked to modifications in specific spectral components.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 5

MuLoRA: Spectrally Balanced Low-Rank Adaptation for Continual Learning

MuLoRA introduces a spectrally balanced low‑rank adaptation method for continual learning, addressing the issue of spectral plasticity collapse where adaptation energy concentrates in few singular modes. It uses historical whitening to identify task‑adaptive input directions and approximate polar orthogonalization of momentum updates to reduce spectral concentration, ensuring effective utilization of the low‑rank space. Experiments on five class‑incremental benchmarks and eight incremental settings show MuLoRA achieving the highest mean accuracy in 15 of 16 metrics.

By Junkang Liu