mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Learning Style, Forgetting Semantics: A Case Study of SFT and RFT on Classification Tasks

arXiv 2610.02437 ↗First posted 1 Oct 2026stat.ML cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Why does supervised fine-tuning (SFT) lead to more forgetting than reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT), even when all teacher demonstrations are semantically correct? We study this question on classification tasks where tokens within each semantic class express the same semantic answer in different styles. The tasks share an underlying semantic rule but differ in their prompt distributions and teachers' stylistic preferences. Using a tractable linear-softmax policy, we derive an exact decomposition of the updates into semantic and style components. We show that, at a common policy and prompt, SFT and RFT have parallel semantic updates but differ in their style dynamics. Starting from a policy with no within-class style preference, RFT with exact policy gradients preserves this symmetry, whereas SFT with a nonuniform teacher develops off-axis style drift along a nonzero task mean under population updates. We use this drift to establish a separation under explicit conditions: for population updates from a common perfectly fitted checkpoint, SFT forgetting admits a strictly positive lower bound over a finite training interval, while RFT retains zero semantic error. Simulations over task sequences support these theoretical predictions.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Oct 2026.

Builds on

24 of 34 references.

References · 24

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  3. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
  4. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
  5. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
  6. 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,787
  7. 2022Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Modelscited by 3,024
  8. 2023LIMA: Less Is More for Alignmentcited by 1,100
  9. 2018Experience Replay for Continual Learningcited by 1,095
  10. 2018Efficient Lifelong Learning with A-GEMcited by 1,058
  11. 2017PackNet: Adding Multiple Tasks to a Single Network by Iterative Pruningcited by 898
  12. 2023A Comprehensive Survey of Continual Learning: Theory, Method and Applicationcited by 872
12 more
  1. 2018Riemannian Walk for Incremental Learning: Understanding Forgetting and Intransigencecited by 742
  2. 2025SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes: A Comparative Study of Foundation Model Post-trainingcited by 672
  3. 2023An Empirical Study of Catastrophic Forgetting in Large Language Models During Continual Fine-tuningcited by 639
  4. 2026Self-Distillation Enables Continual Learningcited by 247
  5. 2025RL's Razor: Why Online Reinforcement Learning Forgets Lesscited by 176
  6. 2025Retaining by Doing: The Role of On-Policy Data in Mitigating Forgettingcited by 94
  7. 2023Theory on Forgetting and Generalization of Continual Learningcited by 72
  8. 2024Theory on Mixture-of-Experts in Continual Learningcited by 54
  9. 2025Reinforcement Fine-Tuning Naturally Mitigates Forgetting in Continual Post-Trainingcited by 47
  10. 2023Continual Learning in Linear Classification on Separable Datacited by 34
  11. 2024Understanding Forgetting in Continual Learning with Linear Regressioncited by 30
  12. 2026A Quantitative Characterization of Forgetting in Post-Trainingcited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Mitigating Forgetting Between Supervised and Reinforcement Learning Yields Stronger Reasoners
  2. 2025SEFE: Superficial and Essential Forgetting Eliminator for Multimodal Continual Instruction Tuning
  3. 2026On-Policy Replay for Continual Supervised Fine-Tuning
  4. 2025Why Reinforcement Fine-Tuning Enables MLLMs Preserve Prior Knowledge Better: A Data Perspective
  5. 2026Are Parameter-Efficient Fine-tuning Methods Really Different?
  6. 2026Entropy-Adaptive Fine-Tuning: Resolving Confident Conflicts to Mitigate Forgetting
  7. 2024Scaling Laws for Forgetting When Fine-Tuning Large Language Models
  8. 2026RAFT: Data Refinement and Adaptive Distillation for Domain Fine-Tuning with Alleviated Forgetting