Organizations: Department of Computer Science, Rice University, Houston, USA · Department of Computer Science, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, USA · Department of Computer Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA · Department of Computer and Data Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.
On-policy distillation (OPD) trains student models under their own induced distribution while leveraging supervision from stronger teachers. We identify a failure mode of OPD: as training progresses, on-policy rollouts can undergo abrupt length inflation, causing truncated trajectories to dominate the training data. This truncation collapse coincides with abrupt repetition saturation and induces biased gradient signals, leading to severe training instability and sharp degradation in validation performance. We attribute this problem to the interaction between student-induced data collection and the distillation objective, which implicitly favors long and repetitive rollouts. To address this issue, we propose StableOPD, a stabilized OPD framework that combines a reference-based divergence constraint with rollout mixture distillation. These together mitigate repetition-induced length inflation and further stabilize OPD training. Across multiple math reasoning datasets, our approach prevents truncation collapse, stabilizes training dynamics, and improves performance by 7.2% on average.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Abrupt length inflation within OPD.
Figure 2: Training dynamics of OPD on three groups. Training starts in a stable regime with low truncation and repetition, followed by a sharp phase transition where truncation and repetition increase and remain high while validation accuracy collapses, illustrating a robust truncation-repetition inflation failure mode of OPD.
Figure 3: Rollout-level evidence of abrupt repetition inflation for three student-teacher groups. Around the step where rollout length abruptly inflates, both student and teacher log_prob become much less negative, with the teacher’s increase being larger, which induces a sudden jump in the reveser KL advantage.
Figure 4: Reverse-KL advantage for regular and repetitive tokens during OPD training. Repetitive tokens receive larger advantages than regular tokens throughout training.
Model
Avg
MATH-500
Minerva
Olympiad
AMC
AIME24
AIME25
Qwen2.5-Math-7B
19.1
43.6
7.4
15.6
31.3
11.5
4.9
Qwen2.5-Math-7B-Instruct
37.6
80.4
32.7
41.0
48.5
12.5
10.2
SimpleRL-Zero
37.4
76.0
25.0
34.7
54.9
27.0
6.8
OpenReasoner-Zero
41.0
82.4
33.1
47.1
52.1
16.5
15.0
PRIME-Zero
40.8
81.4
39.0
40.3
54.0
17.0
12.8
Oat-Zero
43.8
78.0
34.6
43.4
61.2
33.4
11.9
Table 1: Accuracy on six mathematical benchmarks for Qwen2.5-Math-7B. The best performance on each benchmark is highlighted in bold . For OPD-based methods we use OpenThinkerV3 as teacher models.
Figure 5: Training dynamics of OPD vs. Stable-OPD. Student: Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B; Teacher: OpenThinker3-7B.
Method
Avg. Acc (%)
Qwen2.5-MATH-1.5B
16.0
OPD
28.0
OPD + KL
29.7
OPD + KL + Mixture Distillation
35.7
Table 2: Ablation studies of KL regularization and mixture distillation on average accuracy.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Model
Avg
MATH-500
Minerva
Olympiad
AMC
AIME24
AIME25
Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B
16.0
28.0
9.6
21.2
26.4
7.2
3.6
Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B-Instruct
35.7
77.4
28.7
39.1
48.1
12.1
8.9
SFT
31.9
70.6
26.8
31.3
37.8
11.7
13.2
GRPO
30.1
61.8
26.8
32.0
40.2
11.8
7.7
OPD
28.9
56.7
23.4
31.0
35.9
11.1
15.0
Stable-OPD
36.1
73.9
32.6
37.4
43.0
13.8
16.0
Appendix
Table 3: Accuracy on six mathematical benchmarks for Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B. The best performance on each benchmark is highlighted in bold . For OPD-based methods we use OpenThinkerV3 as teacher models.
Model
Avg
MATH-500
Minerva
Olympiad
AMC
AIME24
AIME25
Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B
16.0
28.0
9.6
21.2
26.4
7.2
3.6
Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B-Instruct
35.7
77.4
28.7
39.1
48.1
12.1
8.9
SFT
31.9
70.6
26.8
31.3
37.8
11.7
13.2
GRPO
30.1
61.8
26.8
32.0
40.2
11.8
7.7
OPD †
28.0
58.4
22.4
26.9
36.2
10.9
13.1
Stable-OPD †
35.7
72.0
32.7
34.9
43.0
14.6
17.2
Appendix
Table 4: Accuracy on six mathematical benchmarks. The best performance on each benchmark is highlighted in bold . † denotes models distilled from DeepSeek-R1-Distill-7B, and ‡ denotes models distilled from OpenThinkerV3.
Figure 6: Training dynamics of OPD vs. Stable-OPD. Student: Qwen2.5-Math-1.5B; Teacher: DeepSeek-R1-Distill-7B.
Figure 7: Dynamics of OPD across training. Each panel shows truncation/repetition for both rollout and evaluation versus accuracy. Sudden accuracy changes often align with abrupt shifts in teacher log-probabilities and advantage estimates.
On-policy distillation (OPD) and on-policy self-distillation (OPSD) have emerged as promising post-training methods for large language models, offering dense token-level supervision on trajectories sampled from the model's own policy. However, existing results on their effectiveness remain mixed: while OP(S)D has shown promise in system prompt and knowledge internalization, recent studies also report instability and degradation. In this work, we present a comprehensive empirical study of when OPD and OPSD work, when they fail, and why. We find that OPD on mathematical reasoning is highly sensitive to teacher choice and loss formulation, whereas OPSD fails in our tested settings due to test-time absence of instance-specific privileged information (PI). In contrast, OPSD is effective when PI represents a shared latent rule, such as a system prompt or alignment preference. We identify three failure mechanisms: (1) distribution mismatch between teacher and student caused by conditioning on student-generated prefixes, (2) optimization instability from biased TopK reverse-KL gradients, and (3) an OPSD-specific limitation where the student learns a PI-free policy that aggregates PI-conditioned teachers, which is insufficient when PI is instance-specific. We further show that stop-gradient TopK objectives, RLVR-adapted teachers, and SFT-stabilized students mitigate these failures.
Siqi Zhu, Xuyan Ye, Hongyu Lu +2
1UIUC · 2Renmin University of China · †Work done during an internship at UIUC. +1
On-policy distillation (OPD) is increasingly used in LLM post-training because it can leverage a teacher model to provide dense supervision on student rollouts. The standard implementation, however, usually reduces distribution matching to a sampled-token log-ratio, which can make the learning signal fragile on long rollouts whose prefixes drift away from the teacher's typical support. We revisit this formulation from both theoretical and implementation perspectives. Theoretically, token-level OPD is biased relative to sequence-level reverse-KL minimization, but admits a substantially tighter worst-case variance bound; a controlled synthetic study further shows that stronger future-reward coupling increases gradient variance and destabilizes training. Empirically, we identify three failure modes of sampled-token OPD: imbalanced token-level supervision, unreliable teacher guidance on student-generated prefixes, and tokenizer or special-token mismatch. These findings motivate teacher top-K local support matching, a truncated reverse-KL objective that compares teacher and student distributions over a teacher-supported token set at each prefix, together with top-p rollout sampling and special-token masking. Across single-task reasoning and multi-task benchmarks spanning agentic and reasoning settings, this objective improves optimization stability and yields a +19.8% performance gain over standard sampled-token OPD baselines, providing a practical recipe for more stable on-policy distillation.
Yuqian Fu, Haohuan Huang, Kaiwen Jiang +4
State Key Laboratory of Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Systems, CASIA · School of Artificial Intelligence, UCAS · Fudan University +1
On-policy distillation (OPD) has become an important approach to language model post-training. However, despite its performance gains, OPD can also collapse into excessively long and repetitive generation, and the mechanism underlying these divergent outcomes remains poorly understood. We explain these outcomes through a reinforcement learning perspective: the teacher implicitly rewards student behaviors, even those it rarely exhibits itself. From this perspective, our experiments show that OPD improves performance without expanding the student's capabilities. When the implicit reward model is reliable, OPD makes correct responses easier to sample. In contrast, when the preference misaligns with quality, reward hacking happens: the implicit reward model amplifies overlong, repetitive student rollouts, even though it rarely generates such text itself. Guided by this diagnosis, we find that masking unhealthy responses during training and using SFT initialization can each effectively mitigate the collapse. Together, these findings show that OPD amplifies student behaviors favored by the teacher's implicit feedback, shifting the focus from how well the teacher generates to how reliably it evaluates student rollouts. Our code is available at https://github.com/HancCui/opd_hacking.