Nash-MOPD: Optimizing Task Trade-offs in Multi-Teacher On-Policy Distillation

Multi-teacher on-policy distillation (MOPD) distills several domain-expert teachers into a single student by minimizing per-domain reverse-KL divergence on the student's own rollouts. Existing approaches typically fix the per-domain data mixture before training, overlooking the fact that different domains converge at substantially different rates: some plateau early while others continue to improve throughout the training budget. A fixed mixture therefore wastes compute on fast-converging domains and undertrains slower-converging ones. To address this, we propose D$^3$-MOPD (Dynamic Domain ScheDuling for MOPD), a zero-overhead scheduler that repurposes the per-domain reverse-KL signal already produced during training to adapt the domain mixture online. Running asynchronously outside the training process, an off-process watcher periodically tracks each domain's KL trajectory, estimates remaining headroom and current improvement rate, and accordingly adjusts the domain sampling ratios without altering the core training loop. Our D$^3$-MOPD scales naturally to arbitrary numbers of domains, and the expected benefit grows as more domains introduce more diverse convergence patterns for the scheduler to exploit. On a Qwen3.6-35B-A3B student distilled from four domain-expert teachers, D$^3$-MOPD closes 97% of the average student-to-teacher performance gap, compared with 63% for vanilla MOPD, reaches the same peak performance with an approximately 3$\times$ reduction in rollout steps, and surpasses the specialist teachers on three of seven benchmarks.

Reinforcement learning can turn one language model into several specialists, each excellent at a single skill such as mathematics, coding or following instructions, but users need one model with all of these skills. Multi-teacher on-policy distillation (MOPD) merges them by letting the specialists teach one student: the student answers each prompt, and the specialist for that prompt's domain gives feedback on every token. This routing decides which specialist teaches, but not how strongly its feedback moves the shared student. In Qwen3.5 models at three sizes, we find that MOPD's student does not beat one taught by the best single specialist and gains little of the mathematics specialist's advantage. The feedback is unbalanced: instruction-following feedback is several times more spread out than mathematics feedback and dominates the student's updates. We propose Domain-Normalized MOPD (DN-MOPD), which keeps the routing and rescales each domain's feedback by its measured spread. On six public benchmarks, DN-MOPD improves the average score over MOPD at every size, across three random seeds and under two answer-length limits, and recovers most of the lost mathematics gain. Controls with fixed domain weights show that the gain comes mainly from turning down instruction-following feedback rather than turning up mathematics alone, and that fixed weights close to those DN-MOPD measures perform comparably. Combining specialists therefore requires deciding not only which one teaches, but also how strongly its feedback counts.

Multi-teacher on-policy distillation (MOPD) aims to combine the strengths of RL-trained teachers in a single student, but how teacher signals affect parameter changes remains underexplored. We study Qwen3-1.7B with four domain teachers trained with RL from the same initialization as the student, comparing gradients, optimizer updates, and task learning curves, with additional SmolLM3-3B diagnostics. We find that several factors influence teacher signals. First, loss averaging implicitly weights responses: token averaging favors longer responses, and equalizing domain contributions retains this weighting within domains. Second, Adam's first moment reduces differences in parameter updates: the cosine similarity is 0.83 between teachers and 0.96 between averaging rules, despite differences in raw gradients. Third, BF16 rounding hides small changes: about 97% of FP32 master weights differ from initialization, but only 7--11% of BF16 weights do. Finally, the top-64 intersection KL gradient closely matches Qwen's full-vocabulary gradient, but the effect on task performance depends on averaging: mathematics accuracy is 2.6 points higher than with sampled-token policy-gradient (PG) under response averaging and 2.1 points lower under global token averaging.