Papers › RECALL: Replay-based Continual Learning in Semantic Segmentation

RECALL: Replay-based Continual Learning in Semantic Segmentation

8 Aug 2021ICCV 2021 10arXiv:2108.03673archive 2025-07-28

Andrea Maracani, Umberto Michieli, Marco Toldo, Pietro Zanuttigh

Deep networks allow to obtain outstanding results in semantic segmentation, however they need to be trained in a single shot with a large amount of data. Continual learning settings where new classes are learned in incremental steps and previous training data is no longer available are challenging due to the catastrophic forgetting phenomenon. Existing approaches typically fail when several incremental steps are performed or in presence of a distribution shift of the background class. We tackle these issues by recreating no longer available data for the old classes and outlining a content inpainting scheme on the background class. We propose two sources for replay data. The first resorts to a generative adversarial network to sample from the class space of past learning steps. The second relies on web-crawled data to retrieve images containing examples of old classes from online databases. In both scenarios no samples of past steps are stored, thus avoiding privacy concerns. Replay data are then blended with new samples during the incremental steps. Our approach, RECALL, outperforms state-of-the-art methods.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

18 samples harvested; 5 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 13 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 18 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from LTTM/RECALL. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

1 archive task tag without a task page not shown.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections