What is the state of the art in continual machine learning? Although a natural question for predominant static benchmarks, the notion to train systems in a lifelong manner entails a plethora of additional challenges with respect to set-up and evaluation. The latter have recently sparked a growing amount of critiques on prominent algorithm-centric perspectives and evaluation protocols being too narrow, resulting in several attempts at constructing guidelines in favor of specific desiderata or arguing against the validity of prevalent assumptions. In this work, we depart from this mindset and argue that the goal of a precise formulation of desiderata is an ill-posed one, as diverse applications may always warrant distinct scenarios. Instead, we introduce the Continual Learning EValuation Assessment Compass, CLEVA-Compass for short. The compass provides the visual means to both identify how approaches are practically reported and how works can simultaneously be contextualized in the broader literature landscape. In addition to promoting compact specification in the spirit of recent replication trends, the CLEVA-Compass thus provides an intuitive chart to understand the priorities of individual systems, where they resemble each other, and what elements are missing towards a fair comparison.
翻译:机器持续学习的艺术状态是什么?虽然对主要静态基准来说是一个自然的问题,但以终身方式培训系统的概念在设置和评价方面带来了大量额外的挑战,后者最近引发了对突出的算法中心观点和评价协议过于狭窄的越来越多的批评,导致数次试图建立有利于具体贬低或反对普遍假设有效性的准则。在这项工作中,我们脱离了这种思维模式,认为精确地表述贬低是一个错误的目标,因为不同的应用可能总是需要不同的设想。相反,我们采用了持续学习估价评估指南,CLEVA-Compass用于简短的。指南提供了视觉手段,既可以确定实际如何报告方法,又可以同时如何在更广泛的文学景观中结合工作。除了在近期复制趋势的精神中促进契约性说明外,CLEVA-Compass提供了直截了当的图表,以了解各个系统的优先事项,彼此相似之处,以及缺少哪些要素来进行公平的比较。