analiza aiqbench
This research reveals a critical flaw in knowledge distillation for small language models, where improving context-following on clear tasks simultaneously degrades refusal calibration on ambiguous ones. The study demonstrates that aggregate bias metrics can mask this asymmetric harm, as distinct mechanisms drive the loss of per-item safety while maintaining overall refusal rates. By proposing Per-Condition Calibration Diagnosis (PCCD), the authors offer a necessary protocol to detect these hidden failure modes before deployment in sensitive applications.
The Asymmetric Effects of Knowledge Distillation on Bias in Small Language Models
arXiv:2607.28639v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We show that knowledge distillation in small instruction-tuned language models has asymmetric effects on bias. On unambiguous tasks (BBQ-disambig), response-based distillation from a Gemma-2-9B teacher improves context-following: for the most biased baseline (SmolLM2-1.7B-Instruct), it cuts the context-overriding error rate from 44% to 24%. On ambiguous tasks (BBQ-ambig), the same distillation destroys per-item refusal calibration: 15% of items where the baseline correctly abstained instead receive stereotype answers, even when overall refusal rate is preserved. The pattern reproduces on a second student family (OLMo-2-1B-Instruct), with silence-loss of 8% and filled-silence accounting for 89% of new bias. Across the full 28-configuration grid, the magnitudes of silence-loss and filled-silence are uncorrelated (Spearman $\rho=0.19$, n.s.), indicating that the two effects arise from distinct mechanisms. Aggregate stereotype metrics (CrowS-Pairs, overall BBQ Stereotype Reliance Score) average over both effects and conceal the per-item harm. We trace the calibration loss to a data-side mechanism: an audit of four training corpora finds <0.5% refusal-as-answer-shape. Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with refusal injection either breaks parsing or over-corrects into a trivial-refuser regime (refusal rate 99.8%, disambig accuracy 0.2%) that aggregate metrics would call perfectly calibrated. We propose Per-Condition Calibration Diagnosis (PCCD), a three-step protocol that evaluates refusal calibration, context-following, and capability preservation. PCCD catches both the asymmetric harm and the trivial-refuser failure mode that aggregate evaluations miss.
Abstract:We show that knowledge distillation in small instruction-tuned language models has asymmetric effects on bias. On unambiguous tasks (BBQ-disambig), response-based distillation from a Gemma-2-9B teacher improves context-following: for the most biased baseline (SmolLM2-1.7B-Instruct), it cuts the context-overriding error rate from 44% to 24%. On ambiguous tasks (BBQ-ambig), the same distillation destroys per-item refusal calibration: 15% of items where the baseline correctly abstained instead receive stereotype answers, even when overall refusal rate is preserved. The pattern reproduces on a second student family (OLMo-2-1B-Instruct), with silence-loss of 8% and filled-silence accounting for 89% of new bias. Across the full 28-configuration grid, the magnitudes of silence-loss and filled-silence are uncorrelated (Spearman $\rho=0.19$, n.s.), indicating that the two effects arise from distinct mechanisms. Aggregate stereotype metrics (CrowS-Pairs, overall BBQ Stereotype Reliance Score) average over both effects and conceal the per-item harm. We trace the calibration loss to a data-side mechanism: an audit of four training corpora finds <0.5% refusal-as-answer-shape. Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) with refusal injection either breaks parsing or over-corrects into a trivial-refuser regime (refusal rate 99.8%, disambig accuracy 0.2%) that aggregate metrics would call perfectly calibrated. We propose Per-Condition Calibration Diagnosis (PCCD), a three-step protocol that evaluates refusal calibration, context-following, and capability preservation. PCCD catches both the asymmetric harm and the trivial-refuser failure mode that aggregate evaluations miss.
14 pages, 5 figures. Preprint
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY)
I.2.7; I.2.6; K.4.1
arXiv:2607.28639 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2607.28639v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.28639 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
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 · 323 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Untrusted advice for AI control: Short, strong advice significantly uplifts weak LLMs
LessWrong · 27 iul. 2026

[AINews] DeepSeek v4.1-Flash: 763B-P8B-D16B novel causal Encoder–Decoder architecture with vision marks the Return of the Whale
Latent Space · 12 sept. 2026

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

PIRAMID: Progress and Plans
LessWrong · 27 iul. 2026