atlas

Research map / Continual learning / Continual fine-tuning of LLMs

InfLoRA: Interference-Free Low-Rank Adaptation for Continual Learning

CVPR 2024 · Continual learning › Continual fine-tuning of LLMs · approach: Low-rank and model-merging adaptation · 69 citations (OpenAlex)

Read the paperCheck your idea against 108,967 papers

AI-extracted summary. Written by AI from the paper's full text. Numbers and claims can be wrong or missing context, so check the paper before you cite or build on it.

Proposes InfLoRA, a PEFT-based continual learning method that constrains each new task's LoRA down-projection to a subspace orthogonal to old-task gradient spaces (via DualGPM) so new-task updates don't interfere with old tasks.

Problem

Class-incremental continual learning with frozen pre-trained ViT and PEFT modules, where learning new tasks interferes with old tasks, hurting the stability-plasticity trade-off.

Approach

Reparameterize pre-trained weights with a LoRA branch whose down-projection B_t is pre-designed (via SVD of new-task inputs projected onto the orthogonal complement of old-task gradient space), so only A_t is trained; this makes fine-tuning equivalent to updating W within a subspace that does not interfere with old tasks.

Key results

Measured effects reported in the paper

What was changedWhereMeasuredEffect
Use InfLoRA instead of C-LoRAcontinual learning with ViT-B/16 · ImageNet-R (10 tasks)ACC10: 71.89 ± 0.45 -> 75.65 ± 0.14Helped
Use InfLoRA instead of CODA-Pcontinual learning with ViT-B/16 · ImageNet-R (10 tasks)averaged ACC10: 75.82 ± 0.29 -> 80.82 ± 0.24Helped
Use InfLoRA instead of CODA-Pcontinual learning with ViT-B/16 · CIFAR100 (10 tasks)ACC10: 86.62 ± 0.11 -> 86.51 ± 0.73Hurt
Use InfLoRA instead of CODA-Pcontinual learning with ViT-B/16 · CIFAR100 (10 tasks)averaged ACC10: 91.08 ± 0.28 -> 91.70 ± 0.32Helped
Use InfLoRA instead of CODA-Pcontinual learning with ViT-B/16 · DomainNet (5 tasks)ACC5: 73.23 ± 0.13 -> 74.53 ± 0.23Helped
Use InfLoRA instead of CODA-Pcontinual learning with ViT-B/16 · DomainNet (5 tasks)averaged ACC5: 78.72 ± 0.07 -> 79.57 ± 0.57Helped
Design Bt by projecting new-task inputs into M⊥t and selecting top-r principal components, rather than random Gaussian initialization (ablation)InfLoRA · ImageNet-R (10 tasks)ACC10: 67.38 ± 0.41 -> 75.65 ± 0.14Helped
Add the projection onto M⊥t when designing Bt from Nt (ablation)InfLoRA · ImageNet-R (10 tasks)ACC10: 57.91 ± 0.30 -> 75.65 ± 0.14Helped
Add the new-task subspace Nt when designing Bt from M⊥t (ablation)InfLoRA · ImageNet-R (10 tasks)ACC10: 74.61 ± 0.62 -> 75.65 ± 0.14Helped

Limitations

Experimental setup

Datasets: ImageNet-R CIFAR100 DomainNet

Benchmarks: ImageNet-R CIFAR100 DomainNet

Metrics: final accuracy ACC_T average accuracy accuracy over tasks

Baselines: L2P DualPrompt CODA-P C-LoRA LAE SLCA joint sequential

Builds on: LoRA DualGPM Gradient Projection Memory L2P DualPrompt CODA-P

Closest papers by meaning

Writing a paper in this area? scime draft is a free LaTeX editor with AI included, real-time co-authors and a check of your references and venue rules before you submit. It also imports OpenAI Prism projects.

Open scime draft

Get the next scime Dispatch and a monthly field update

Free. We send a confirmation link first; every email has a one-click unsubscribe. Privacy