Dimensionality Controls When Modularity Helps in Continual Learning

Compositional learning systems must balance plasticity, the ability to acquire new knowledge, with stability, the preservation of previously learned components, especially when tasks share structure and risk interference. We study how modular architecture, task similarity, and representational dimensionality jointly shape compositional continual learning in a sequential A–B–A paradigm, comparing a task‑partitioned recurrent network to a single‑network baseline while inducing high‑ and low‑dimensional regimes via weight‑scale manipulations. In a high‑dimensional “lazy” regime, both architectures achieve similar performance and internal geometry, suggesting that explicit modular structure has little impact when representations are weakly constrained. In a lower‑dimensional “rich” regime, modularity becomes decisive: the modular network develops graded task‑specific subspaces that overlap for similar tasks, partially align for moderately dissimilar tasks, and separate for dissimilar tasks, yielding a more compositional and interpretable organization than the single network. These findings identify representational dimensionality as a key variable that gates when compositional, modular structure is functionally beneficial in continual learning, and support viewing safety and robustness as problems of adaptive allocation of representational subspaces rather than fixed separation versus sharing.