Sources

542 sources

Source

Kang et al. (2025)

In-Context Learning can Perform Continual Learning Like Humans

arXiv

Find It

DOI

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) can adapt to new tasks via in-context learning (ICL) without parameter updates, making them powerful learning engines for fast adaptation. While extensive research has examined ICL as a few-shot learner, whether it can achieve long-term retention and cross-task knowledge accumulation when multitasks arrive sequentially remains underexplored. Motivated by human memory studies, we investigate the retention characteristics of ICL in multitask settings and extend it to in-context continual learning (ICCL), where continual learning ability emerges through task scheduling and prompt rearrangement. Experiments on Markov-Chain benchmarks demonstrate that, for specific large-language models, ICCL benefits from distributed practice (DP) in a manner analogous to humans, consistently revealing a spacing "sweet spot" for retention. Beyond retention performance, we propose a human-retention similarity metric to quantify how closely a continual-learning (CL) method aligns with human retention dynamics. Using this metric, we show that linear-attention models such as MAMBA and RWKV exhibit particularly human-like retention patterns, despite their retention performance lagging behind that of Transformer-based LLMs. Overall, our results establish ICCL as both cognitively plausible and practically effective, providing an inference-only CL paradigm that mitigates catastrophic forgetting and addresses the stability-plasticity dilemma in conventional CL methods.

Reference

Kang, L., Wang, F., Liu, S., Chou, H. C., Lin, C., & Ding, N. (2025). In-Context Learning can Perform Continual Learning Like Humans. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.22764. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2509.22764

What Rests on This

1 mechanism cites this source. Each finding below is quoted as it appears on that mechanism's own page.

Forgetting Memory Processes

  • Measured in AI

    A 2025 preprint fitted the ACT-R decay parameter to in-context retention curves: four models ranged from d = 0.14 (Llama 3) to 0.35, all forgetting more slowly than a human reference of d = 0.50 (SD 0.05) taken from past modelling work, with Mamba and RWKV-7 closest in overall pattern; earlier material stayed in the context window and no human sample was tested, so this does not count either