Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchMachine learning

analiza aiqbench

Wait, I need to format this correctly. Here is the response: aiqbench take: This arXiv paper examines on-policy self-distillation for LLM reasoning, finding that shuffling words in the shared problem statement can modestly improve math benchmark accuracy (up to 3.52 points over standard OPSD on Qwen3-1.7B), while shuffling the teacher-only worked example consistently hurts. The results are from a single model family on three math benchmarks, so the gains are modest and worth replicating before generalizing. The takeaway for practitioners is that semantic coherence of the prompt is not automatically beneficial in self-distillation, and the teacher's reference context appears to matter more than the student-facing problem text. Category: Machine Learning
Sursă care acoperăarXiv

Shuffled OPSD: When Semantic Consistency Hurts On-Policy Self-Distillation?

arXiv3 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2611.04958v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Knowledge distillation improves a student model's reasoning ability through supervision from a teacher. On-policy self-distillation (OPSD) uses the same model as both teacher and student under different contexts: the student generates reasoning trajectories from the question alone, while the teacher additionally receives a complete worked example and provides token-level supervision along those trajectories. Because the problem statement is shared, its content and ordering shape both student generation and teacher feedback. Preserving its semantic structure therefore seems natural, but does it always improve learning? We introduce Shuffled OPSD, which shuffles the words of the shared problem statement while keeping the teacher-only worked example intact. Across three mathematical reasoning benchmarks and three Qwen3 model scales, the method improves mean accuracy over both an intact-target control and Standard OPSD under matched training configurations. The largest gain over Standard OPSD is 3.52 percentage points on Qwen3-1.7B. Further controls show that preserving larger word blocks offers no advantage over word-level shuffling at the evaluated scales, whereas shuffling the teacher-only worked example reduces accuracy at every scale. Cross-problem mixing and target-removal experiments further distinguish the roles of problem content, word order, and teacher context. These results show that disrupting the shared problem statement can improve learning, while disrupting the teacher-only reference hurts performance. They challenge semantic coherence as a universally beneficial principle for OPSD and motivate closer study of how input structure shapes student generation and teacher supervision.

Title:Shuffled OPSD: When Semantic Consistency Hurts On-Policy Self-Distillation?

Abstract:Knowledge distillation improves a student model's reasoning ability through supervision from a teacher. On-policy self-distillation (OPSD) uses the same model as both teacher and student under different contexts: the student generates reasoning trajectories from the question alone, while the teacher additionally receives a complete worked example and provides token-level supervision along those trajectories. Because the problem statement is shared, its content and ordering shape both student generation and teacher feedback. Preserving its semantic structure therefore seems natural, but does it always improve learning? We introduce Shuffled OPSD, which shuffles the words of the shared problem statement while keeping the teacher-only worked example intact. Across three mathematical reasoning benchmarks and three Qwen3 model scales, the method improves mean accuracy over both an intact-target control and Standard OPSD under matched training configurations. The largest gain over Standard OPSD is 3.52 percentage points on Qwen3-1.7B. Further controls show that preserving larger word blocks offers no advantage over word-level shuffling at the evaluated scales, whereas shuffling the teacher-only worked example reduces accuracy at every scale. Cross-problem mixing and target-removal experiments further distinguish the roles of problem content, word order, and teacher context. These results show that disrupting the shared problem statement can improve learning, while disrupting the teacher-only reference hurts performance. They challenge semantic coherence as a universally beneficial principle for OPSD and motivate closer study of how input structure shapes student generation and teacher supervision.

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2611.04958 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2611.04958v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.04958 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.

Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 338 cuvinte