When Sparse Reward Meets Dense Distillation: Training Dynamics of On-Policy Distillation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards provides a sparse post-training signal: a single binary outcome evaluates the entire rollout, and every token receives the same sequence-level advantage regardless of its individual contribution. To complement this sparse supervision, a growing family of methods adds a scalar-weighted teacher KL term to the policy-gradient objective, providing dense token-level guidance that may be unreliable at some positions. Despite the benefits of combining these signals, their interaction during optimization can destabilize joint training. To understand how this instability develops, we study the learning dynamics of hybrid reward--distillation training through a neural tangent kernel (NTK) analysis. We introduce the cross-signal NTK KDR(n), a token-level statistic that measures the alignment between reward and distillation gradients at position n. Through this analysis, we identify two failure modes: 1 Magnitude drowning, where the reward gradient exceeds the distillation gradient by orders of magnitude, so that even weak directional conflict can cause the distillation loss to rise despite its explicit inclusion in the training objective; and 2 Localized directional conflict, where the sequence-level advantage and the teacher's position-specific distribution induce opposing updates at the same token (KDR(n)!<!0). The severity of these effects depends on the optimization regime: the gradient-norm ratio kappa!=!|nablaLR|/|nablaLD| varies by roughly an order of magnitude across tasks, and our experiments reveal an empirical threshold beyond which naive mixing can lead to persistent training collapse. Motivated by these findings, we introduce the M3 family, which combines magnitude normalization with three strategies...
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.
Builds on
21 of 23 references.
References · 21
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
- 2025DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scalecited by 2,678
- 2018Neural Tangent Kernel: Convergence and Generalization in Neural Networkscited by 2,597
- 2017Multi-Task Learning Using Uncertainty to Weigh Losses for Scene Geometry and Semanticscited by 1,345
- 2025Understanding R1-Zero-Like Training: A Critical Perspectivecited by 1,276
- 2020Gradient Surgery for Multi-Task Learningcited by 1,210
- 2023On-Policy Distillation of Language Models: Learning from Self-Generated Mistakescited by 840
- 2017GradNorm: Gradient Normalization for Adaptive Loss Balancing in Deep Multitask Networkscited by 816
- 2018Multi-Task Learning as Multi-Objective Optimizationcited by 809
- 2018End-to-End Multi-Task Learning with Attentioncited by 533
- 2021Conflict-Averse Gradient Descent for Multi-task Learningcited by 441
9 more
- 2026Self-Distilled Reasoner: On-Policy Self-Distillation for Large Language Modelscited by 386
- 2026Reinforcement Learning via Self-Distillationcited by 285
- 2022Multi-Task Learning as a Bargaining Gamecited by 209
- 2022Defining and Characterizing Reward Hackingcited by 184
- 2026Self-Distilled RLVRcited by 109
- 2024Learning Dynamics of LLM Finetuningcited by 93
- 2026HDPO: Hybrid Distillation Policy Optimization via Privileged Self-Distillationcited by 39
- 2024Direct Preference Knowledge Distillation for Large Language Modelscited by 19
- 2025NTKMTL: Mitigating Task Imbalance in Multi-Task Learning from Neural Tangent Kernel Perspectivecited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.