Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.28194

Adaptive Pullback: Reweighting Supervision at Penalty Jumps in On-Policy Distillation

Guangyu Liu·Siyuan Gan·Shilong Zhou·Linjian Meng·Boyan Wang·Jing Huo
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

On-policy distillation (OPD) supervises student-generated responses using sampled-token student-teacher log-ratios. A positive log-ratio penalizes a token that the student assigns higher probability to than the teacher, but its current value does not distinguish sustained high penalties from abrupt increases along a response. We examine these local changes by comparing consecutive blocks of tokens within the same response. Our diagnostic identifies penalty jumps, abrupt increases in average penalty that persist on held-out tokens. Across these jumps, penalties rise while teacher confidence decreases. We call this pattern penalty-confidence tension. Boundaries into high-penalty blocks do not exhibit comparable confidence changes, showing that local changes provide information beyond the current penalty value. Motivated by this observation, we propose Adaptive Pullback OPD (AP-OPD). At each detected jump, AP-OPD uses the preceding block as a local reference and uniformly scales all supervision coefficients in the following block so that its weighted average penalty matches the preceding block's original mean. This reference determines the scaling factor without an additional strength constant. AP-OPD improves performance on both mathematical reasoning and code generation.

Explore related subjects

cs.LGcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Guangyu Liu, Siyuan Gan, Shilong Zhou, Linjian Meng, Boyan Wang, Jing Huo. 2026-10-20. Adaptive Pullback: Reweighting Supervision at Penalty Jumps in On-Policy Distillation. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28194

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Limits of Post-Selection Generalization

While statistics and machine learning offer numerous methods for ensuring generalization, these methods often fail in the presence of adaptivity---the common practice in which the choice of analysis depends on previous interactions with the same dataset. A recent line of work has introduced powerful, general purpose algorithms that ensure post hoc generalization (also called robust or post-selection generalization), which says that, given the output of the algorithm, it is hard to find any statistic for which the data differs significantly from the population it came from. In this work we show several limitations on the power of algorithms satisfying post hoc generalization. First, we show a tight lower bound on the error of any algorithm that satisfies post hoc generalization and answers adaptively chosen statistical queries, showing a strong barrier to progress in post selection data analysis. Second, we show that post hoc generalization is not closed under composition, despite many examples of such algorithms exhibiting strong composition properties.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Quantifying Symptom Causality in Clinical Decision Making: An Exploration Using CausaLM

Current machine learning approaches to medical diagnosis often rely on correlational patterns between symptoms and diseases, risking misdiagnoses when symptoms are ambiguous or common across multiple conditions. In this work, we move beyond correlation to investigate the causal influence of key symptoms-specifically "chest pain" on diagnostic predictions. Leveraging the CausaLM framework, we generate counterfactual text representations in which target concepts are effectively "forgotten" enabling a principled estimation of the causal effect of that concept on a model's predicted disease distribution. By employing Textual Representation-based Average Treatment Effect (TReATE), we quantify how the presence or absence of a symptom shapes the model's diagnostic outcomes, and contrast these findings against correlation-based baselines such as CONEXP. Our results offer deeper insight into the decision-making behavior of clinical NLP models and have the potential to inform more trustworthy, interpretable, and causally-grounded decision support tools in medical practice.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Understanding and Mitigating Under-Confidence in GNNs from the Final Layer

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have demonstrated remarkable effectiveness on graph-based tasks. However, their predictive confidence is often miscalibrated, typically exhibiting under-confidence, which harms the reliability of their decisions. Existing calibration methods for GNNs normally introduce additional calibration components, which fail to capture the intrinsic relationship between the model and the prediction confidence, resulting in limited theoretical guarantees and increased computational overhead. To address this issue, we propose a simple yet efficient graph calibration method. We establish a unified theoretical framework revealing that model confidence is jointly governed by class-centroid-level and node-level calibration at the final layer. Based on this insight, we theoretically show that reducing the weight decay of the final-layer parameters alleviates GNN under-confidence by acting on the class-centroid level, while node-level calibration acts as a finer-grained complement to class-centroid-level calibration, which encourages each test node to be closer to its predicted class prototype in the final-layer representations. Extensive experiments validate the superiority of our method. The code is released at https://github.com/huangJC0429/SCAR.

cs.LG↗