arXiv preprint ·

How Much Do Teacher Bridges Matter in Interleaved On-Policy Distillation?

Leran Chen, Zhiyuan Yao and Lingnan Kong

Published
Source
arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
Original
Read it at arXiv
Topics
Machine LearningComputation & Language / NLP

Abstract

On-policy distillation (OPD) trains a student using teacher predictions on student-generated responses. Some methods insert teacher-written segments, or bridges, but disagree on how to train on those tokens. We compare no loss, forward KL and reverse KL on identical trajectories using Qwen3-1.7B as student and Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 as teacher. We separate gradients by which model wrote each token. Under our short training runs and BF16 inference, pre-specified tests detected no added accuracy benefit from teacher text as context or as a training target. A one-paragraph bridge after the student's first paragraph is only 2.7% of the tokens and contributes a small gradient nearly orthogonal to the student-token gradient. In this main comparison, the three loss treatments gave similar gradient directions and were statistically equivalent in accuracy within a +/-5 percentage-point margin. An exploratory pilot placing the bridge where failed responses disagreed most with the teacher suggested a benefit from teacher-token loss. A pre-specified replication did not confirm this, and fourfold weighting showed no significant accuracy benefit. Two limitations bound these findings. Among the tested amounts of training on fixed responses, gains peaked after four updates before the student increasingly failed to stop generating. None of the tested online training variants met the criteria for stable stopping and improved accuracy. Our evaluations used BF16 inference, which rounds away most of the small weight changes. When evaluated in exact FP32, the tested replication models frequently reached the response-length limit. Our accuracy findings therefore concern BF16 inference; they do not establish that teacher-token supervision is generally unnecessary.

The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.

Read it on ReadSearch

Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.

Already a reader? Sign in

All new papers in Machine Learning

Get the few papers worth your time in Machine Learning every morning.

ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.

Papers belong to their authors and publishers; every page here links to the original. All research topics