CROP: Task Relevance via Counterfactuals for Selective On-Policy Distillation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
On-policy distillation (OPD) supervises a student language model on trajectories sampled from its current policy, but assigns equal credit to response tokens with unequal supervision value. Selective OPD addresses this limitation by allocating supervision non-uniformly across response tokens according to their estimated training value. Most existing criteria, however, focus primarily on optimization need, such as uncertainty or teacher-student disagreement, while task relevance, namely whether the supervision is tied to the semantic content of the current input, remains less directly characterized as a complementary dimension. To address this gap, we introduce Counterfactual Relevance for On-Policy Distillation (CROP), which operationalizes task relevance through a paraphrase-calibrated counterfactual sensitivity margin. For each source prompt, CROP constructs a validated original-paraphrase-counterfactual triplet, holds the student rollout fixed, and measures each response position by its sensitivity to a task-relevant condition change calibrated by its sensitivity to a meaning-preserving rewrite. Matched selection controls show that CROP identifies more useful supervision positions than random or lowest-relevance selection, while component comparisons confirm the value of both counterfactual sensitivity and paraphrase calibration. Across two teacher-student settings, CROP improves aggregate performance by 1.92 and 2.96 points over the strongest non-CROP selector. These results support task relevance as a complementary criterion for selective OPD and establish CROP as a model-internal, contrast-specific method for allocating token-level supervision.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Aug 2026.
Builds on
30 of 35 references.
References · 30
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,748
- 2025DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scalecited by 2,678
- 2023Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 1,143
- 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 988
- 2024Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluatorscited by 865
- 2026Rethinking On-Policy Distillation of Large Language Models: Phenomenology, Mechanism, and Recipecited by 262
- 2026Learning beyond Teacher: Generalized On-Policy Distillation with Reward Extrapolationcited by 157
- 2024GSM-Plus: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating the Robustness of LLMs as Mathematical Problem Solverscited by 155
18 more
- 2026Entropy-Aware On-Policy Distillation of Language Modelscited by 151
- 2026A Survey of On-Policy Distillation for Large Language Modelscited by 148
- 2024ODIN: Disentangled Reward Mitigates Hacking in RLHFcited by 133
- 2026TIP: Token Importance in On-Policy Distillationcited by 90
- 2020Contrastive Code Representation Learningcited by 76
- 2026Scaling Reasoning Efficiently via Relaxed On-Policy Distillationcited by 71
- 2022A Causal Framework to Quantify the Robustness of Mathematical Reasoning with Language Modelscited by 68
- 2025Beyond Reward Hacking: Causal Rewards for Large Language Model Alignmentcited by 42
- 2026Not All Disagreement Is Learnable: Token Teachability in On-Policy Distillationcited by 42
- 2021Retrieval-guided Counterfactual Generation for QAcited by 28
- 2026When Are Teacher Tokens Reliable? Position-Weighted On-Policy Self-Distillation for Reasoningcited by 24
- 2026On the Position Bias of On-Policy Distillationcited by 23
- 2026OGLS-SD: On-Policy Self-Distillation with Outcome-Guided Logit Steering for LLM Reasoningcited by 14
- 2026Cornerstones or Stumbling Blocks? Deciphering the Rock Tokens in On-Policy Distillationcited by 11
- 2026From Generic Correlation to Input-Specific Credit in On-Policy Self Distillationcited by 9
- 2026CRAFT: Counterfactual Credit Assignment from Free Sibling Rollouts for Self-Distilled Agentic Reinforcement Learningcited by 7
- 2025Mitigating Length Bias in RLHF through a Causal Lenscited by 4
- 2026Supervised Fine-Tuning versus Reinforcement Learning: A Study of Post-Training Methods for Large Language Modelscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026Who Teaches Which Token? Verifier-Gated Multi-Expert On-Policy Distillation for Scientific Reasoningcited by 2
- 20261% of Tokens Can Be Enough: On Gradient Estimation in On-Policy Distillationcited by 1
- 2026Beyond Teacher Assignment: Domain-Normalized Multi-Teacher On-Policy Distillationcited by 0
- 2026OPSRD: On-Policy Self-Role Distillationcited by 0
- 2026DIAL-OPD: Learning More from Fewer Tokens in On-Policy Distillationcited by 0
- 2026DIAL-OPD: Learning More from Fewer Tokens in On-Policy Distillation8 Oct 2026
- 2026OPSRD: On-Policy Self-Role Distillation30 Sep 2026
- 2026Beyond Teacher Assignment: Domain-Normalized Multi-Teacher On-Policy Distillation28 Sep 2026
- 20261% of Tokens Can Be Enough: On Gradient Estimation in On-Policy Distillation21 Sep 2026
- 2026Who Teaches Which Token? Verifier-Gated Multi-Expert On-Policy Distillation for Scientific Reasoning14 Sep 2026