arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2406.03216cs.LGcs.AI

持续学习中PEFT技术的选择:Prompt Tuning并非万能之选

Choice of PEFT Technique in Continual Learning: Prompt Tuning is Not All You Need

AWS(亚马逊云科技);Aleph Alpha(阿莱夫阿尔法)

Martin Wistuba, Prabhu Teja Sivaprasad, Lukas Balles, Giovanni Zappella

AI总结:

本文质疑持续学习中默认使用prompt tuning的合理性,发现在Learning to Prompt和S-Prompts中改用LoRA能提升准确率且保持推理速度,强调需通过严格消融实验推动该领域进展。

摘要:

最近的持续学习(CL)方法将预训练的Transformer与prompt tuning(一种参数高效微调(PEFT)技术)相结合。我们认为,先前研究对prompt tuning的选择是一个未经论证且未经消融的决策,虽然被后续研究不加批判地采用,但仍需要进一步研究以理解其影响。在本文中,我们开展了这项研究,发现选择prompt tuning作为PEFT方法会损害CL系统的整体性能。为了说明这一点,我们在两种最先进的持续学习方法Learning to Prompt和S-Prompts中,用LoRA替换了prompt tuning。这些变体在广泛的领域增量和类增量基准上始终达到更高的准确率,同时在推理速度上具有竞争力。我们的工作强调了一个关键论点:未经检验的选择会阻碍该领域的进展,需要进行严格的消融实验(如PEFT方法),以推动CL技术在现实应用中的有意义采用。

英文摘要:

Recent Continual Learning (CL) methods have combined pretrained Transformers with prompt tuning, a parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) technique. We argue that the choice of prompt tuning in prior works was an undefended and unablated decision, which has been uncritically adopted by subsequent research, but warrants further research to understand its implications. In this paper, we conduct this research and find that the choice of prompt tuning as a PEFT method hurts the overall performance of the CL system. To illustrate this, we replace prompt tuning with LoRA in two state-of-the-art continual learning methods: Learning to Prompt and S-Prompts. These variants consistently achieve higher accuracy across a wide range of domain-incremental and class-incremental benchmarks, while being competitive in inference speed. Our work highlights a crucial argument: unexamined choices can hinder progress in the field, and rigorous ablations, such as the PEFT method, are required to drive meaningful adoption of CL techniques in real-world applications.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑