aiqbench analysis
This research investigates the limitations of on-policy distillation when transferring reasoning capabilities from larger Qwen3 models to significantly smaller student variants. The study reveals that while solving accuracy improves across all scales, the ability for small models to correctly terminate long reasoning chains ("stopping") is not effectively transferred in thinking mode, causing them to often fail to commit to correct answers they derive. These findings provide a crucial diagnostic for understanding the specific behavioral gaps between teacher and student architectures during knowledge transfer.
Solving Without Stopping: On-Policy Distillation at Small Scale
arXiv:2609.37326v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: On-policy distillation, where a student learns from a stronger teacher's feedback on its own outputs, is a common way to pass reasoning to smaller models. We analyze what it transfers at small scale, distilling Qwen3-8B into Qwen3 4B, 1.7B and 0.6B students, in thinking mode (reason at length, then end the reasoning and answer) and, for comparison, in non-thinking mode (no separate reasoning phase). Long reasoning needs two abilities, solving a problem and knowing when it is solved, and we find that distillation transfers the first, but in thinking mode not the second. Solving improves at every size, up to two ceilings, which we measure comprehensively across both modes and all student sizes: a student's single attempt never exceeds what it could already reach in many attempts before training, and the smaller the student, the further it stays below the teacher. Stopping is where the modes part. In non-thinking mode every student keeps stopping; in thinking mode students stop ending their reasoning early in training, and the smaller the student, the less of this ability survives: the teacher signals a stop almost only where a student already ends its reasoning, so distillation teaches no new stops; it only keeps the student's existing stops that land on a right answer, and a weak student has few such stops. The smallest students often reach the right value but do not commit to it: they either rarely mark it or mark it and write past it. Together, these results describe how small students behave under on-policy distillation, and a diagnostic that separates answer marking, correctness and stopping.
Abstract:On-policy distillation, where a student learns from a stronger teacher's feedback on its own outputs, is a common way to pass reasoning to smaller models. We analyze what it transfers at small scale, distilling Qwen3-8B into Qwen3 4B, 1.7B and 0.6B students, in thinking mode (reason at length, then end the reasoning and answer) and, for comparison, in non-thinking mode (no separate reasoning phase). Long reasoning needs two abilities, solving a problem and knowing when it is solved, and we find that distillation transfers the first, but in thinking mode not the second. Solving improves at every size, up to two ceilings, which we measure comprehensively across both modes and all student sizes: a student's single attempt never exceeds what it could already reach in many attempts before training, and the smaller the student, the further it stays below the teacher. Stopping is where the modes part. In non-thinking mode every student keeps stopping; in thinking mode students stop ending their reasoning early in training, and the smaller the student, the less of this ability survives: the teacher signals a stop almost only where a student already ends its reasoning, so distillation teaches no new stops; it only keeps the student's existing stops that land on a right answer, and a weak student has few such stops. The smallest students often reach the right value but do not commit to it: they either rarely mark it or mark it and write past it. Together, these results describe how small students behave under on-policy distillation, and a diagnostic that separates answer marking, correctness and stopping.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2609.37326 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.37326v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.37326 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 362 words
Related coverage

[AINews] The Future of Latent Space
Latent Space · Sep 25, 2026

[AINews] Opus 5.5 is good at explainer videos
Latent Space · Sep 29, 2026

How can LLM RL Work Despite Information-Theoretic Inefficiency
LessWrong · Oct 16, 2026

Runway’s WorldPrompt and the Engineering of Real-Time Worlds
Latent Space · Sep 25, 2026