# Towards Understanding On-Policy Distillation through the Lens of Test-Time Scaling

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.11829 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.11829/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 44 of its 54 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Aug 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/prompting-and-chain-of-thought-reasoning/)
- Knowledge distillation / [On-policy and self-distillation for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/distill/on-policy-and-self-distillation-for-llms/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 44)

- [Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1503.02531/) (2015)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.03551/) (2017)
- [DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14476/) (2025)
- [LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07974/) (2024)
- [Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.01210/) (2023)
- [Constructing A Multi-hop QA Dataset for Comprehensive Evaluation of Reasoning Steps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.01060/) (2020)
- [When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric Memories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10511/) (2022)
- [DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.19348/) (2026)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13837/) (2025)
- [On-Policy Distillation of Language Models: Learning from Self-Generated Mistakes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13649/) (2023)
- [Sequence-Level Knowledge Distillation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.07947/) (2016)
- [Distilling Step-by-Step! Outperforming Larger Language Models with Less Training Data and Smaller Model Sizes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.02301/) (2023)
- [Rethinking On-Policy Distillation of Large Language Models: Phenomenology, Mechanism, and Recipe](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.13016/) (2026)
- [A Survey on Knowledge Distillation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13116/) (2024)
- [ProRL: Prolonged Reinforcement Learning Expands Reasoning Boundaries in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.24864/) (2025)
- [MiMo-V2-Flash Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.02780/) (2026)
- [Learning beyond Teacher: Generalized On-Policy Distillation with Reward Extrapolation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.12125/) (2026)
- [Entropy-Aware On-Policy Distillation of Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.07079/) (2026)
- [Skywork Open Reasoner 1 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22312/) (2025)
- [A Survey of On-Policy Distillation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.00626/) (2026)
- [Revisiting On-Policy Distillation: Empirical Failure Modes and Simple Fixes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.25562/) (2026)
- [The Invisible Leash: Why RLVR May or May Not Escape Its Origin](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.14843/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [SCOPE-OPSD: Fisher-Conditioned Privileged Subspaces for On-Policy Self-Distillation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.12579/) (2026)
- [Understanding On-Policy Distillation: A Mechanistic Interpretability Perspective via Sparse Crosscoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.35210/) (2026)
- [Solving Without Stopping: On-Policy Distillation at Small Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.37326/) (2026)
- [Instruct, Not Answer: Using Instruction Privileges in On-Policy Context Distillation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.32201/) (2026)
- [On-Policy Distillation Teaches New Skills but Not New Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.09639/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

On-policy distillation (OPD) has emerged as a promising post-training technique for enhancing LLM reasoning. Under the reverse KL objective, the idealized optimum of OPD aligns the student distribution with that of the teacher. When the teacher consistently outperforms the student, this naturally suggests that OPD should yield broad improvements over the pre-OPD student. However, do such improvements extend across the entire range of test-time sampling budgets? In this work, we revisit this expectation through the lens of test-time scaling by varying the sampling budget K and evaluating performance with pass@K. Across multiple settings, we observe two distinct patterns: OPD can improve pass@K at both small and large sampling budgets, but it can also improve small-budget performance while reducing large-budget pass@K. We show one condition that guarantees such a reversal and an idealized reverse KL counterexample where it occurs even when the teacher has higher accuracy on every problem. To choose between two candidate teachers at a target sampling budget, we propose the textitTeacher Advantage Score at K (TAS@K), which can be computed before OPD training to predict which teacher will lead to a larger improvement in pass@K. Across three domains and thirteen benchmarks, the ordering predicted by TAS@K agrees with the observed pass@K improvements of the resulting OPD models in 83.6% of experiments, providing a useful signal for teacher selection at the target pass@K.