Jianshu Zhang

Jianshu Zhang, Yankai Fu, Ziheng Peng et al.

This paper introduces a novel perspective to significantly mitigate catastrophic forgetting in continuous learning (CL), which emphasizes models' capacity to preserve existing knowledge and assimilate new information. Current replay-based methods treat every task and data sample equally and thus can not fully exploit the potential of the replay buffer. In response, we propose COgnitive REplay (CORE), which draws inspiration from human cognitive review processes. CORE includes two key strategies: Adaptive Quantity Allocation and Quality-Focused Data Selection. The former adaptively modulates the replay buffer allocation for each task based on its forgetting rate, while the latter guarantees the inclusion of representative data that best encapsulates the characteristics of each task within the buffer. Our approach achieves an average accuracy of 37.95% on split-CIFAR10, surpassing the best baseline method by 6.52%. Additionally, it significantly enhances the accuracy of the poorest-performing task by 6.30% compared to the top baseline. Code is available at https://github.com/sterzhang/CORE.

Zhenyu Pan, Yutong Zhang, Jianshu Zhang et al.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) already achieve state-of-the-art results across a wide range of tasks and modalities. To push their reasoning ability further, recent studies explore advanced prompting schemes and post-training fine-tuning. Although these techniques improve logical accuracy, they frequently leave the models' outputs burdened with pronounced social biases. Clarifying how reasoning gains interact with bias mitigation-and whether the two objectives inherently trade off-therefore remains an open and pressing research problem. Our study begins by benchmarking three bias-mitigation strategies-supervised fine-uning (SFT), knowledge distillation (KD), and rule-based reinforcement learning (RL)-under identical conditions, establishing their baseline strengths and weaknesses. Building on these results, we vary the proportion of debias-focused and reasoning-centric samples within each paradigm to chart the reasoning-versus-bias trade-off. Our sweeps reveal a consistent sweet spot: a roughly 1:4 mix trained with reinforcement learning cuts stereotype scores by 10% while retaining 88% of the model's original reasoning accuracy, offering concrete guidance for balancing fairness and capability in MLLMs.