Cross-tokenizer distillation (CTD), the transfer of knowledge from a teacher to a student language model when the two use different tokenizers, remains a largely unsolved problem. Existing approaches rely on heuristic strategies to align mismatched vocabularies, introducing considerable complexity. In this paper, we propose a simple but effective baseline called Byte-Level Distillation (BLD) which enables CTD by operating at a common interface across tokenizers: the byte level. In more detail, we convert the teacher's output distribution to byte-level probabilities, attach a lightweight byte-level decoder head to the student, and distill through this shared byte-level interface. Despite its simplicity, BLD performs competitively with--and on several benchmarks surpasses--significantly more sophisticated CTD methods, across a range of distillation tasks with models from 1B to 8B parameters. Our results suggest that the byte level is a natural common ground for cross-tokenizer knowledge transfer, while also highlighting that consistent improvements across all tasks and benchmarks remain elusive, underscoring that CTD is still an open problem.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Representation of our Byte-Level Distillation (BLD) method composed of two steps. Step 1 adds a byte-level interface to the student model. Step 2 performs distillation by transferring knowledge from the teacher to the student using the shared byte-level interface. Additional next-token prediction and next-byte prediction losses are also used following standard distillation approaches. The byte-level interface can be removed at the end of the process.
Model
Method
Benchmark
PiQA
ARC-C
BoolQ
MMLU
AGI-EN
AGI-ZH
IFEval
original (Llama3.2 3B IT)
75.46
45.73
78.41
60.50
35.27
42.93
66.31
→ Qwen2
SFT
74.54
41.89
76.48
57.11
30.47
34.30
26.74
DSKD
62.95
28.84
71.80
50.48
26.12
34.18
28.13
MinED
75.35
42.58
78.65
58.20
34.68
34.76
62.83
ALM + SFT
75.46
45.82
79.36
58.86
36.64
35.27
58.51
Table 1: Results of transferring Llama3.2 3B ( Meta, 2024 ) to the Qwen2 tokenizer ( Yang et al., 2024 ) . original denotes the original model without transfer. ARC-C refers to Arc-Challenge. AGI-EN and AGI-ZH refer to the English and Chinese splits of AGIEval.
Model
Method
Benchmark
PiQA
ARC-C
BoolQ
MMLU
AGI-EN
AGI-ZH
IFEval
original (Llama3.2 3B IT)
75.46
45.73
78.41
60.50
35.27
42.93
66.31
→ Byte
SFT
67.30
31.57
73.00
38.95
26.05
35.18
24.70
DSKD
64.47
31.31
60.34
37.62
23.74
33.36
23.98
MinED
67.41
32.94
65.32
39.84
27.52
33.90
31.89
ALM + SFT
66.32
31.57
71.41
39.15
27.66
35.39
29.74
Table 2: Results of transferring Llama3.2 3B ( Meta, 2024 ) to byte-level tokenization. original denotes the original model without transfer. ARC-C refers to Arc-Challenge. AGI-EN and AGI-ZH refer to the English and Chinese splits of AGIEval.
Model
Method
GSM8K
MATH
OpenMath2-Llama3.1-8B
87.26 ±0.92
37.60 ±2.16
Gemma2 2B IT
51.48 ±1.38
10.60 ±1.38
Gemma2 2B
SFT
59.29 ±1.35
22.40 ±1.87
ALM + SFT
61.56 ±1.34
19.00 ±1.76
Ours
62.55 ±1.33
20.08 ±1.82
Table 3: Results of cross-tokenizer distilling the large math-specialized OpenMath2-Llama3.1-8B ( Toshniwal et al., 2024 ) into the small Gemma2 2B ( Deepmind, 2024 ) language model. All results are zero-shot CoT.
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 2: Training and validation losses for a Llama3.2-1B model with added byte-level head trained on a subset of the TULU-3 dataset with supervised fine-tuning only at the byte level. The top row plots are for training curves, while bottom row ones are for validation.
Table 4: Training hyperparameters used in all experiments. The Search Space column lists the values explored during hyperparameter tuning; a dash indicates the value was fixed without search.
Cross-tokenizer logits distillation enables knowledge transfer across model families, allowing students to learn from stronger or more specialized teachers. However, differences in vocabulary and segmentation make teacher and student next-token distributions difficult to align. Existing logits-based methods are easy to integrate into standard distillation pipelines, but often rely on restrictive heuristics or tokenizer-pair-specific choices. They may restrict supervision to shared vocabulary subsets, require manually selecting different objectives for different tokenizer pairs, or match only the observed chunk and its complement rather than individual alternative continuations. We introduce Common-Support Distillation (CSD), a unified logits-based framework that constructs a shared support between the teacher and student at each aligned input chunk and matches the induced distributions with a single objective. For one-to-one alignments, CSD uses explicit common-token pairs as the shared support. For other alignments, it constructs a virtual support whose probabilities are computed using the autoregressive chain rule. A residual event captures probability mass outside the explicit support, ensuring that both induced distributions remain normalized. Across four teacher-student settings comprising Llama-3.2-1B and Gemma3-1B-PT students with Qwen and Phi teachers, CSD consistently achieves the highest average performance among the evaluated cross-tokenizer methods, outperforming the strongest alternative by up to 1.8 points and surpassing both continued pretraining and same-tokenizer distillation. For Llama-3.1-8B, CSD improves average accuracy over the strongest evaluated baseline by up to 4.2 points for the base student and 1.6 points for the instruction-tuned student.
Cross-tokenizer knowledge distillation allows a student model to learn from teachers with incompatible vocabularies. Prior work operates on hidden states or logits; the latter is preferred as a drop-in replacement requiring no auxiliary components. Logit-based methods either use only the correct-token probability, missing the full 'dark knowledge' in the teacher's distribution, or operate on the full output distribution, relying on strict token partitioning and/or unprincipled heuristic ranking. We identify two key shortcomings of full-distribution, logit-based methods: (i) an uncommon-token failure, where critical tokens fall into the unmatched subset (e.g., Llama's 1100 multi-digit numerals under digit-splitting Qwen supervision) and are suppressed during training, reducing GSM8k from 12.89 to 2.56 compared to same-tokenizer KD from a weaker teacher; and (ii) over-conservative matching, where strict 1-to-1 matching excludes near-equivalent tokens across surface forms. These failures require distinct remedies: eliminating the partition when critical tokens are misaligned, and refining it when alignment is reliable. We propose X-Token, an approach with two complementary loss formulations targeting these issues. P-KL removes partitioning and aligns the student's distribution with the teacher's via a sparse projection matrix W (initialized from tokenizer-level string rules) to address the uncommon-token failure. H-KL retains the hybrid form while relaxing matching to align each student token with its top-ranked teacher mapping under W. Both objectives share W and extend naturally to multiple teachers. Empirically, on Llama-3.2-1B, X-Token outperforms the current state of the art GOLD by +3.82 average points with a Qwen3-4B teacher and by +0.5 with a Phi-4-Mini teacher. Further, a two-teacher setup (Phi-4-mini + Llama-3B) improves over single-teacher distillation by +1.3 points.
Sharath Turuvekere Sreenivas, Adithyakrishna Venkatesh Hanasoge, Mingyu Yang +4
Open-weight language models from different families exhibit complementary capabilities, motivating their consolidation into a compact student through on-policy distillation (OPD). However, full-vocabulary OPD typically assumes a shared tokenizer, while existing cross-tokenizer methods may discard teacher probability mass or assign it to student tokens with unrelated content. We introduce Byte-Prefix Marginalization (BPM), which re-expresses the teacher's next-token distribution over the student vocabulary in a shared byte space. Specifically, BPM assigns each teacher token's probability to the longest student token whose byte representation is a prefix of the teacher token's bytes, aggregates mass mapped to the same student token, and places otherwise unmatched mass in an explicit residual category. This produces a vocabulary-complete, byte-aligned, and mass-preserving target for dense OPD. The target exactly recovers the teacher-induced byte-prefix marginal when the relevant prefix does not span multiple teacher tokens (a condition satisfied at more than 99% of training positions) and uses a mass-preserving, chain-factorized lower bound otherwise. Across Qwen3-32B, GLM-Z1-9B-0414, and MiniMax-M2.7 as teachers, BPM consistently outperforms current cross-tokenizer methods on six mathematics and programming benchmarks, improving six-benchmark avg@8 by 3.7-6.6 points over the strongest baselines.
Hao Wang, Kun Yuan, Wenlin Zhong +4
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · KwaiKAT Team · Zhejiang University +1