OPDSearch+: On-Policy Distillation with RL Refinement for Search-Augmented Reasoning
Authors: Qinglin Ye, Zhiyuan Gu, Jingjie Xia, Yiheng Zhang, Kaiyan Zhao, Shunchao Zheng, Yuhang Mu, Wenchao Du, Yiming Wang
Organizations: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences · Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences · University of Macau · Wuhan University · Georgia Institute of Technology · Northwestern Polytechnical University · University of Hong Kong
Search-augmented reasoning remains difficult for small language models. On-policy distillation (OPD) from trained teachers offers a promising direction, but suffers from two issues: (1) high-quality multi-turn search trajectories depend on dynamic retriever responses, making SFT data prohibitively expensive to collect at scale; (2) task-specifically trained teachers incur substantial training cost, while directly applying OPD with an off-the-shelf teacher without task-specific fine-tuning constrains the student to the teacher's performance ceiling and suffers from severe training instability. We propose OPDSearch+, the first distillation paradigm that requires no teacher fine-tuning for search-augmented reasoning. We investigate the role of a frozen off-the-shelf instruct model as the teacher in on-policy distillation, and reveal a key insight: the teacher reshapes the student's policy distribution so that subsequent RL converges to a superior solution that RL alone cannot reach. In stage one, the student interacts with a live search engine and is distilled via a per-position forward KL objective, transferring reasoning decomposition and evidence integration skills without any task-specific teacher training. In stage two, RL refines the distilled student from a richer behavioral foundation, achieving performance that RL alone cannot reach from scratch. Across seven QA benchmarks, OPDSearch+ with a 3B model consistently outperforms all prior 3B RL baselines, achieving gains of 13.1% on HotpotQA and 8.5% on 2WikiMultihopQA.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Left: Prior OPD requires costly task-specific teacher training; pure RL shows limited multi-hop gains. Right: OPDSearch+ eliminates teacher training by using a frozen off-the-shelf teacher. The teacher reshapes the student’s distribution via on-policy distillation, enabling subsequent RL to escape local optima and achieve strong single-hop, multi-hop, and in-domain performance.
Figure 2: Comparison between RL-based search agent training (Search-R1) and our On-Policy Distillation (OPDSearch+) framework. (a) Search-R1 uses outcome reward (EM/F1) to train the model via GRPO, which conflates retrieval quality with answer correctness and suffers from reward hacking. (b) OPDSearch+ generates on-policy trajectories from the student interacting with a live search engine, then distills the teacher’s token-level distribution onto these trajectories. The teacher’s search behavior serves as implicit supervision for both reasoning and retrieval, providing a strong initialization for subsequent RL refinement.
Method
Size
Single-Hop QA
SH-Avg
Multi-Hop QA
Avg
NQ †
TriviaQA ⋆
PopQA ⋆
HotpotQA †
2Wiki ⋆
Musique ⋆
Bamboogle ⋆
3B Methods (same model size as OPDSearch+)
Direct Generation ⋄
3B
0.106
0.288
0.108
0.167
0.149
0.244
0.020
0.024
0.134
SFT ⋄
3B
0.249
0.292
0.104
0.215
0.186
0.248
0.044
0.112
0.176
Naive RAG ⋄
3B
0.348
0.544
0.387
0.426
0.255
0.226
0.047
0.080
0.270
Search-o1 ⋄
3B
0.238
0.472
0.262
0.324
0.221
0.218
0.054
0.320
0.255
Table 1: Performance comparison on QA benchmarks (Exact Match). OPDSearch+ uses a 3B student model. † indicates in-distribution training data. ⋆ indicates out-of-distribution test sets. ⋄ indicates numbers cited from prior work. Best in bold , second best underlined .
Figure 3: OPD training dynamics (14B → 3B, forward-KL). (a) Distillation loss decreases rapidly in the first ∼ 50 steps and stabilizes around 0.2 . (b) Validation EM improves progressively across all benchmarks.
Objective
Stability
Best Val EM
Grad Norm
Forward-KL (Ours)
Stable (400+ steps)
0.493
0.73–1.19
Rev-KL Adaptive
Stable (160+ steps)
0.470
0.23–0.32
Rev-KL Clipped
Degrades by step ∼ 60
0.136
2.2–4.5
Rev-KL JSD
Collapses at step ∼ 20
—
75.0 → NaN
Rev-KL Log-Ratio
Collapses at step ∼ 20
—
→ NaN
Table 2: Comparison of distillation objectives under matched hyperparameters (all 3B student, 14B teacher, same lr/ αkl /rollout config). Under these shared settings, only the entropy-adaptive variant avoids collapse among reverse-KL alternatives, but it still underperforms our forward-KL objective. Collapses may be mitigable with objective-specific tuning (see text).
Figure 4: Distillation objective comparison under matched hyperparameters (all 14B → 3B). (a) Validation EM: Forward-KL (ours) achieves the highest performance and continues improving through 400 steps. Rev-KL Adaptive avoids collapse but plateaus below forward-KL. Three other reverse variants collapse under default settings. (b) Gradient norm: Forward-KL maintains stable norms ( ∼ 0.8–1.2); Adaptive has lower norms ( ∼ 0.3) but this does not translate to better EM.
Method
Single-Hop QA
SH-Avg
Multi-Hop QA
Avg
NQ
TriviaQA
PopQA
HotpotQA
2Wiki
Musique
Bamboogle
Teacher model evaluated directly (no training)
Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct (teacher)
0.3019
0.5633
0.3404
0.4019
0.2811
0.2624
0.1059
0.3040
0.3084
Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct (teacher)
0.3630
0.6479
0.3919
0.4676
0.3916
0.3513
0.1592
0.4844
0.3985
Pure RL baseline (GRPO, no distillation)
Search-R1-Base (3B) ⋄
0.421
0.583
0.413
0.472
0.297
0.274
0.066
0.128
0.312
Table 3: Ablation study on teacher scale and two-stage training (full test set evaluation, Exact Match). All methods use Qwen2.5-3B as the student/policy model. “OPD only” denotes pure on-policy distillation without RL. “OPD → RL” denotes the two-stage approach (OPD warmup followed by GRPO fine-tuning). “Offline SFT” trains on teacher-generated correct trajectories (EM-filtered). ⋄ indicates numbers cited from prior work. ‡ indicates our reproduced RL baseline using R=0.9⋅REM+0.1⋅Rformat (same reward as our OPD → RL stage). Best in bold .
Post-training has become the dominant recipe for turning a language model into a competent search-augmented reasoning agent. A line of recent work pushes its performance further by adding elaborate machinery on top of this standard pipeline. These augmentations import external supervision from stronger external systems, attach auxiliary modules such as process reward models or retrospective critics, restructure the rollout itself with tree search or multi-stage curricula, or shape the reward with hand-crafted bonuses and penalties. Each addition delivers a measurable gain, but each also inflates the training pipeline and ties the recipe to resources or designs that may not always be available. We take a step back and ask whether any of this machinery is actually necessary, and propose Search-E1, a self-evolution method that lets a search-augmented agent improve through only vanilla GRPO interleaved with on-policy self-distillation (OPSD). After each GRPO round, the policy rolls out on its own training questions. A token-level forward KL objective then aligns the policy's inference-time distribution to its own distribution under a privileged context that exposes a more efficient sibling trajectory. Despite this simplicity, the procedure naturally provides dense per-step supervision. On seven QA benchmarks, Search-E1 reaches 0.440 average EM with Qwen2.5-3B, surpassing all open-source baselines at both scales. Code and complete version will be made public soon.
Search-augmented reasoning agents interleave internal reasoning with calls to an external retriever, and their performance relies on the quality of each issued query. However, under outcome-reward reinforcement learning, every search decision in a rollout shares the same trajectory-level reward, leaving individual queries without step-specific credit. Recent process-supervision approaches address this gap by drawing step-level signals from outside the policy, relying either on a much larger teacher model, or on sub-question annotations produced by a stronger external system. In contrast, we propose SD-Search, which derives step-level supervision from the policy itself through on-policy hindsight self-distillation, requiring neither an external teacher nor additional annotations. In SD-Search, a single model plays two roles that differ only in conditioning: a student that sees only the context available at inference time, and a teacher that additionally conditions on a compact hindsight block summarizing the search queries and final outcomes of a group of rollouts sampled from the same question. Since the teacher knows how each rollout unfolded and which ones succeeded, its query distribution implicitly marks which decisions were worth making, and the student is trained to recover this behavior by minimizing the token-level Jensen--Shannon divergence to the teacher at search-query positions. This layers a dense, step-level signal on top of GRPO's coarse trajectory reward. Crucially, this signal is produced by the policy itself within the standard RL training loop, without external model inference, auxiliary annotation pipeline, or additional training stage.
On-policy distillation (OPD) improves the reasoning capabilities of small language models through token-level teacher supervision on student-generated trajectories. Yet can teachers that excel at solving problems independently also guide student reasoning effectively? Prior work shows that when student prefixes follow reasoning paths that differ from the teacher's own or contain errors, teachers can be less accurate when continuing from these prefixes than when solving problems independently. To this end, we propose Prep-OPD, which uses reinforcement learning (RL) before distillation to train the teacher to adapt to the student's existing reasoning state and correct course when errors arise. Training optimizes teacher continuations from fixed student prefixes using final-answer correctness as the reward. The prepared teacher then trains the student through trajectory guidance and token-level supervision. We evaluate Prep-OPD on eight mathematical reasoning benchmarks, using Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507 as the teacher and Qwen3-0.6B and Qwen3-1.7B as students. With the 4B teacher and 1.7B student, Prep-OPD improves average accuracy over standard OPD and the strongest baseline, Relay-OPD, by 8.28 and 2.30 percentage points, respectively. Controlled experiments further show that teacher RL conditioned on student-generated prefixes yields higher student accuracy than problem-start teacher RL with and without handoff on Qwen3-1.7B. Reusing the same prepared teacher also improves Qwen3-0.6B.
Xiaoyu Ma, Haoyue Liu, Zhichao Wang +2
School of Science and Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen · Shenzhen Future Network of Intelligence Institute (FNiI-Shenzhen) · Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Future Networks of Intelligence, CUHK(SZ)