What Do Students Learn? A Feature-Level Analysis of Dark Knowledge

Knowledge distillation trains a smaller student to match the outputs of a larger teacher. Feature-based methods also align intermediate representations, but this extra constraint may affect students differently. We study this question on CIFAR-100 using a ResNet-50 teacher, a width-controlled CustomResNet family and MobileNetV2 as a cross-design comparison. For each student, we evaluate each feature method against a matched logit-KD run using the same teacher, optimizer settings, training schedule and seed. We repeat the main comparisons across multiple seeds. Logit KD improved every tested student over its scratch baseline. Attention Transfer showed no clear relationship with size inside the CustomResNet family, but its average effect was negative for that family and positive for MobileNetV2. FitNets was below logit KD in all 15 paired runs. Within the constant-depth width sweep, its gap increased for wider students, although the different-depth w=48 student did not follow this trend. Finally, the same auxiliary coefficient produced different gradient scales across students, showing that a fixed coefficient does not create a uniform training condition.

We investigate how teacher-student capacity relationships modulate knowledge distillation (KD) effectiveness in ResNet-based image classification on CIFAR-10. Across four teacher-student pairs (R50->R18, R34->R18, R50->R34, and R101->R34) we compare Logit-KD and Feature-KD under a strict evaluation protocol: hyperparameters and checkpoints are selected on a held-out validation split, selected configurations are re-run with five seeds, and the test set is used exclusively for final reporting. Beyond accuracy, we measure distillation fidelity directly via teacher-student agreement and KL divergence. We report four findings. First, the student-capacity pattern survives the corrected protocol at reduced magnitude: the only statistically significant gains occur for R34 students under Feature-KD (+0.19 and +0.21 pp, p<0.05), in two pairs whose teachers differ two-fold in parameters but not in accuracy, localizing the moderating variable on the student side, while no KD gain for R18 students is distinguishable from zero. Second, Feature-KD matches or outperforms Logit-KD in all four pairs, and its students land closer to the teacher's output distribution (KL at T=1) than Logit-KD students despite never observing teacher logits. Third, top-1 teacher-student agreement is flat across all pairs, decoupling fidelity from accuracy gains. Fourth, architecture dominates KD: correcting the ResNet stem for 32x32 inputs is worth +5.5 to +7.2 pp, more than 25x the largest KD gain. We also retract an attribution made in v1: a controlled re-run shows the reported gradient-clipping bug had no measurable effect, and v1's larger gains are explained by test-set selection. Code and results: github.com/umutonuryasar/kd-capacity-gap (tag v2.0).

Knowledge distillation (KD) trains a compact student by attracting it towards a converged teacher. It is silent about which directions the teacher itself learned to suppress: repulsive and bias-aware objectives exist, but none exploits the teacher's own trajectory to identify what the student should avoid. We observe that the missing signal is already encoded in the teacher's optimization trajectory: features that an early-stage teacher emphasizes but that a converged teacher attenuates are precisely the shortcut directions worth pushing the student away from. We instantiate this observation as \textbf{A}nti-\textbf{S}hortcut \textbf{D}istillation (ASD), a push--pull KD framework that treats the converged teacher $\Tfinal$ as a positive semantic anchor and an early-checkpoint teacher $\Tearly$ as a temporal negative reference. ASD couples two losses: a temporal contrastive loss ($\Ltc$) that places the early-teacher feature as a same-sample negative against in-batch and memory-bank final-teacher features in an InfoNCE objective; and a shortcut suppression loss ($\Lss$) that penalizes student projection onto the top eigenvectors of $\E[\Dh\Dh^{\top}]$, the uncentered second-moment matrix of early-to-final feature displacements. Across 13 teacher--student pairs on CIFAR-100, ImageNet-100, and TinyImageNet, ASD attains the highest clean top-1 accuracy on more than 10 pairs and outperforms standard KD on 12. On CIFAR-100-C corruption robustness, ASD obtains the lowest mean Corruption Error ($86.1$,mCE) on the most challenging cross-architecture pair (WRN-40-2$\to$ShuffleNet-V2). Mechanistic diagnostics confirm the intended geometry: the ASD student is systematically anti-aligned with the shortcut direction, while its projection onto the robust subspace is substantially larger ($0.45$ vs.\ $0.12$).