Supervised fine-tuning treats the expert demonstration or gold response as a one-hot target, suppressing valid alternative continuations that the model would otherwise assign probability to. We propose Gold-Conditioned Distillation (GCD), a method that turns expert demonstrations into model-native supervision. GCD uses one model as both teacher and student: the teacher conditions on a prompt containing the gold response in context, the student conditions on the original prompt as at inference, and the student is trained to minimize the forward KL divergence to the teacher's next-token distribution at each gold response token. This lets the model use its prior knowledge to teach itself the new task: correctness is anchored by the gold response, while the soft target preserves plausible alternatives. Across various training tasks on Qwen and Llama models, GCD improves new-task accuracy over SFT and generally reduces degradation on general benchmarks.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of Gold-Conditioned Distillation (GCD). The student predicts the next token from the query x and the gold-response prefix y<t ; the teacher predicts it from a privileged context that additionally contains the full gold response y and a repeat prompt. The student is trained with a forward KL loss to match the teacher’s gold-conditioned next-token distribution, and the teacher is an exponential moving average of the student.
Method
Tooluse
Chemistry
Physics & Material
Biology
Avg.
Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct
Base
34.02
30.77
44.83
76.67
46.57
SFT
60.83
65.09
63.79
85.94
68.91
SDFT
55.67
63.31
52.30
83.53
66.38
GCD
66.30
66.67
63.22
86.45
70.66
Qwen3-4B-Base
Table 1: New-task accuracy (%) across four downstream tasks and four backbone models. Bold and underline mark the best and second-best among SFT / SDFT / GCD per (model, task) cell (Base excluded).
Model
Method
New Task
Previous Tasks
Avg.
MMLU
HellaSwag
Winogrande
TruthfulQA
IFEval
New Task: Tooluse
Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct
Base
34.02
65.45
74.85
69.69
58.63
53.33
64.39
SFT
60.83
64.39
72.41
69.14
52.17
40.28
59.68
SDFT
55.67
65.10
74.22
69.22
58.65
41.22
61.68
GCD
66.30
64.71
72.62
69.93
52.84
38.49
59.72
Table 2: Previous capability retention on five general benchmarks after fine-tuning on Tooluse (%). Bold and underline denote the best and second-best results among SFT / SDFT / GCD per (model, column) cell (Base excluded).
Figure 2: Learning New Knowledge from Scratch. We report evaluation accuracy as a function of training epochs for Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct, Qwen3-4B-Base and Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct on LiveNews dataset.
Model
Method
New Task
Previous Tasks
Avg.
MMLU
HellaSwag
Winogrande
TruthfulQA
IFEval
New Task: LiveNews
Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct
Base
1.50
65.45
74.85
69.69
58.63
53.33
64.39
SFT
36.75
64.86
74.37
67.80
36.78
43.41
57.44
SDFT
10.25
65.12
74.80
69.69
53.94
35.12
59.73
GCD
38.00
65.19
74.24
69.06
36.54
44.48
57.90
Table 3: Previous capability retention on five general-purpose benchmarks after fine-tuning on LiveNews (%). The gray Base row gives pre-fine-tuning performance. Bold and underline denote the best and second-best among SFT / SDFT / GCD per (model, column) cell (Base excluded).
Base
SFT
GCD
Teacher πT
π(gold)
0.10
0.94
0.86
0.55
Mass on teacher top-5
0.62
0.05
0.13
0.45
Mass on base top-5
0.88
0.05
0.10
0.46
Top-5 Jaccard w/ base
0.99
0.14
0.27
0.26
Table 4: Token-level distribution statistics at low-confidence gold positions on Tooluse (Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct). Compared with SFT, GCD assigns less saturated probability to the gold token while preserving substantially more mass on both the gold-conditioned teacher’s top alternatives and the base model’s natural continuations.
Figure 3: Comparison of GCD with alternative regularization or soft-label baselines.
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Dataset
Domain
Answer format
#Train
#Eval
Tooluse
API tool calling
API name + JSON args
4,046
97
Chemistry
Mixed scientific QA (chemistry-heavy)
4-option MCQ
2,674
507
Physics & Material
Physics + materials science
4-option MCQ
1,257
174
Biology
School- and graduate-level biology
2/3/4-option MCQ
1,107
583
LiveNews
Post-training-cutoff news QA
Free-form answer
400
400
Appendix
Table 5: Dataset overview. #Train and #Eval give the number of training and held-out evaluation examples.
Figure 4: Learning-rate sensitivity of SDFT versus our GCD on LiveNews. Each panel shows accuracy across four training epochs for one model. Gray curves are SDFT runs, darker for higher learning rates; the red curve is GCD at its single reported learning rate. SDFT’s best learning rate is model-specific and improves the method only marginally, while GCD dominates the entire SDFT envelope on every panel.
EMA rate α
LiveNews
Tooluse
0 (frozen teacher)
34.25
64.95
0.01 (default)
38.00
66.30
0.05
35.75
62.89
0.2
36.25
16.49
1.0 (teacher = student)
20.50
0 0.00
Appendix
Table 6: Effect of the EMA update rate α on GCD (Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct, new-task accuracy in %, final checkpoint).
KL direction
LiveNews
Tooluse
Forward (default)
38.00
66.30
Reverse
11.00
55.67
Appendix
Table 7: Effect of the KL direction on GCD (Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct, new-task accuracy in %, final checkpoint).
Method
Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct
Qwen3-4B-Base
Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct
SFT
61.1 ± 0.7
63.2 ± 0.6
66.0 ± 0.4
SDFT
56.4 ± 0.6
61.2 ± 0.8
35.6 ± 0.7
GCD
66.7 ± 0.6
69.6 ± 0.5
66.9 ± 0.4
Appendix
Table 8: Tooluse accuracy (%) over five random seeds, reported as mean ± standard deviation.
Current post-training methods in verifiable settings fall into two categories. Reinforcement learning (RLVR) relies on binary rewards, which are broadly applicable and powerful, but provide only sparse supervision during training. Distillation provides dense token-level supervision, typically obtained from an external teacher or using high-quality demonstrations. Collecting such supervision can be costly or unavailable. We propose Self-Distillation Zero (SD-Zero), a method that is substantially more training sample-efficient than RL and does not require an external teacher or high-quality demonstrations. SD-Zero trains a single model to play two roles: a Generator, which produces an initial response, and a Reviser, which conditions on that response and its binary reward to produce an improved response. We then perform on-policy self-distillation to distill the reviser into the generator, using the reviser's token distributions conditioned on the generator's response and its reward as supervision. In effect, SD-Zero trains the model to transform binary rewards into dense token-level self-supervision. On math and code reasoning benchmarks with Qwen3-4B-Instruct and Olmo-3-7B-Instruct, SD-Zero improves performance by at least 10% over the base models and outperforms strong baselines, including Rejection Fine-Tuning (RFT), GRPO, and Self-Distillation Fine-Tuning (SDFT), under the same question set and training sample budget. Extensive ablation studies show two novel characteristics of our proposed algorithm: (a) token-level self-localization, where the reviser can identify the key tokens that need to be revised in the generator's response based on reward, and (b) iterative self-evolution, where the improving ability to revise answers can be distilled back into generation performance with regular teacher synchronization. Code: https://github.com/princeton-pli/Self-Distillation-Zero.
Yinghui He, Simran Kaur, Adithya Bhaskar +7
Princeton University · University of Toronto · Carnegie Mellon University
Distillation enables student language models to acquire new capabilities from expert teachers. However, integrating knowledge from multi-teacher, multi-domain demonstrations into a single student remains challenging. We study supervised fine-tuning (SFT) in this setting, where students must acquire diverse capabilities while maintaining generalization beyond the training tasks. Our experiments reveal varying trade-offs between in-distribution learning and out-of-distribution generalization across SFT methods, motivating more explicit control over this balance. To this end, we propose soft-target fine-tuning (SoFT) to balance learning from teacher demonstrations with retaining the Base model's existing capabilities. SoFT sets a minimum target probability for each demonstrated token while making the smallest KL change to the Base distribution. The resulting objective couples learning from demonstrations with adaptively weighted regularization toward the Base model. We further use domain-specific gradient budgets to control this balance and determine a probability threshold for each trajectory. Experiments on mixed-domain reasoning and agentic tasks show that SoFT achieves the best overall performance among the compared methods, with improvements in both in-distribution capability acquisition and out-of-distribution generalization.
On-policy self-distillation fine-tuning (SDFT) learns new skills from demonstrations while reducing forgetting, but it always distils toward the full demonstration-conditioned teacher. This fixes teacher influence at the full-teacher endpoint, providing no control over how much demonstration information should be transferred at each prediction state. We introduce Information-Proximal SDFT (iSDFT), which instead treats the teacher as a budgeted source of information. At each token, iSDFT selects the distribution closest to the current student that satisfies a prescribed teacher-information constraint, yielding a closed-form exponential target with a locally determined tilt. To control cumulative drift, we further anchor the student to its frozen base policy. Across four heterogeneous LLM backbones and two specialisation tasks, iSDFT improves vanilla SDFT in 7 of 8 model-task settings and matches it in the remaining one. It also provides tighter retention on the original SDFT benchmark suite, with 73% of evaluations remaining within 0.5 points of the base model versus 52% for the strongest baseline, while achieving the largest mean improvement on all ten additional mathematics, coding, and competition-mathematics benchmarks. These results show that controlling how much and when teacher information is introduced improves specialisation while preserving broader capability.
Ahmed Khaled Khamis, Xiaotong Ji, Hassan Jaber +4
Imperial College London · Politecnico di Torino · UCL Centre for AI