# Which Tokens Should SFT Actually Learn? A Token-Trimming Perspective on Mathematical Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.09707 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.09707/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 33 of its 44 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Test-time compute and efficient thinking](https://mlsanity.com/lr/test-time-compute-and-efficient-thinking/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 33)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01574/) (2024)
- [Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14858/) (2022)
- [Qwen2.5-Math Technical Report: Toward Mathematical Expert Model via Self-Improvement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12122/) (2024)
- [Co-teaching: Robust Training of Deep Neural Networks with Extremely Noisy Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.06872/) (2018)
- [When Does Label Smoothing Help?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.02629/) (2019)
- [SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14734/) (2024)
- [Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1708.02002/) (2017)
- [MetaMath: Bootstrap Your Own Mathematical Questions for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.12284/) (2023)
- [WizardMath: Empowering Mathematical Reasoning for Large Language Models via Reinforced Evol-Instruct](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.09583/) (2023)
- [LIMO: Less is More for Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.03387/) (2025)
- [MAmmoTH: Building Math Generalist Models through Hybrid Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.05653/) (2023)
- [Regularizing Neural Networks by Penalizing Confident Output Distributions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1701.06548/) (2017)
- [Analysing Mathematical Reasoning Abilities of Neural Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.01557/) (2019)
- [Mitigating Neural Network Overconfidence with Logit Normalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.09310/) (2022)
- [OpenMathInstruct-1: A 1.8 Million Math Instruction Tuning Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10176/) (2024)
- [Rho-1: Not All Tokens Are What You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.07965/) (2024)
- [On the Generalization of SFT: A Reinforcement Learning Perspective with Reward Rectification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.05629/) (2025)
- [Taming Overconfidence in LLMs: Reward Calibration in RLHF](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09724/) (2024)
- [The Devil is in the Margin: Margin-based Label Smoothing for Network Calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.15430/) (2021)
- [SFT Doesn't Always Hurt General Capabilities: Revisiting Domain-Specific Fine-Tuning in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.20758/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) applies a uniform cross-entropy loss to all target tokens, even though different tokens provide unequal learning signals for mathematical reasoning. This uniform treatment can over-sharpen already mastered tokens while amplifying learning pressure on uncertain, low-confidence tokens, leading to suboptimal training dynamics. We propose Trimmed Logit-Gap SFT (TrimSFT), a simple token-level reweighting method that scales the SFT loss according to the logit gap between the gold token and its strongest competitor. TrimSFT trims supervision away from both extremes: tokens already mastered (large logit gap) and tokens weakly supported by the current model (small or negative logit gap), concentrating learning within an intermediate logit-gap region between them. We instantiate this principle with a Gaussian weight centered at margin m with bandwidth τ, requiring no reference model or additional forward pass. We evaluate TrimSFT on six base models from the Llama, Qwen, and DeepMath families across five mathematical reasoning benchmarks. TrimSFT consistently improves over standard SFT, achieving the best average performance on five out of six models, with gains of up to +26.9 points over SFT on MATH500. Further analyses show that the bandwidth τ matters more than the exact margin location, and that half-trim variants that remove supervision pressure from only one side yield inferior trade-offs. A token-level logit-gap distribution analysis suggests that TrimSFT reshapes model confidence in a more balanced way than uniform SFT or monotonic reweighting methods. These results suggest that reasoning SFT can benefit from trimming both extremes rather than treating all tokens uniformly.