Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 81 references

Latent On-Policy Self-Distillation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read LOPD learns the teacher's hidden context, beating RLVR and fixed-context baselines.

desk verdict A genuinely new OPSD variant with a learnable latent privileged context deserves referee time, but the headline EnvScaler numbers are undercut by test-set tuning and missing error bars. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.13040 v1 pith:QXXXKLXK submitted 2026-08-13 cs.LG cs.CL

Guibin Zhang , Jiayang Lyu , Ran Sun , Xinlei Yu , Haoyu Zhao , Qibing Ren , Shuicheng Yan This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LGcs.CL
keywords on-policyself-distillationlearnableprivilegedcontextlatentcomposeragentictoolusecodegenerationreverseKLdistillationmarginexperiencebankretrieval
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that on-policy self-distillation should not depend on hand-designed privileged artifacts such as oracle answers, textual feedback, or skills; instead, the teacher's privileged context itself should be learned from experience. To test this, it proposes LOPD, which retrieves successful trajectories from an experience bank, compresses them into continuous latent tokens, conditions a frozen self-teacher on those tokens, and distills dense token-level supervision into the student's own rollouts. If the central claim is right, the student alone internalizes the teacher's guidance and matches or beats outcome-reward RL and fixed-context distillation baselines on agentic tool use and code generation while using under 30% of the rollout budget of GRPO and Skill-SD. The authors also claim the framework is a step toward a self-improvement paradigm in which the representation of experience is optimized end-to-end rather than authored by a designer.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the learnable privileged context $c_\phi = \bigoplus_j (\langle e_{j,1}\rangle \oplus \cdots \oplus \langle e_{j,K}\rangle)$: a sequence of continuous latent tokens produced by a composer that encodes each retrieved experience with a frozen backbone plus LoRA and compresses the hidden states with QFormer-style cross-attention against learned query tokens. This context is fed to a fixed teacher that re-scores the student's own prefixes, and the student is trained by reverse-KL distillation against the teacher's top-M-plus-tail token distributions. The second load-bearing piece is the privileged-margin objective, $\max_{\beta\ge 0}\beta(m-\Delta(\phi))$, where $\Delta(\phi)$ is the outcome-weighted teacher log-probability advantage over the student; together with the anchor term $\lambda\|c_\phi-\mathrm{sg}[c_{\phi_0}]\|_2^2$, it excludes the trivial solution in which the teacher simply mimics the student.

What would settle it

A decisive control: train LOPD with the identical hyperparameters but replace every retrieved trajectory in the bank with trajectories from unrelated tasks, or with shuffled task-trajectory pairs. If the resulting student still attains roughly the reported EnvScaler 0.637 and ACEBench 60.6, then the content of retrieved experience is not what drives the gain, and the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that making the teacher's privileged context learnable, rather than prescribed, turns raw retrieved trajectories into a supervision substrate that beats both reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards and previous fixed-context OPSD variants. Concretely, the paper reports the best aggregate result in all ten backbone-benchmark comparisons, with gains that persist when the student is evaluated without any retrieval or latent context; for example, LOPD raises QWEN3-8B EnvScaler reward from a 60.2 baseline to 66.4 and surpasses GRPO and Skill-SD with less than 30% of their rollout budget. The ablations attribute this to joint optimization under the privileged-margin constraint: a frozen composer reaches only 0.573 on EnvScaler, while unconstrained joint optimization collapses to 0.551, and a margin of 0.05 reaches 0.637. The paper concludes that the margin constraint prevents the teacher from collapsing toward the student and is necessary to realize the benefit of learned context.

Load-bearing premise

The whole gain depends on the assumption that, for the task distribution and experience bank at hand, some learnable latent context actually makes the frozen teacher's predictions better than the student's at the prefixes the student visits; if such a context does not exist, even the margin constraint cannot create useful supervision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the claims hold, post-training for agentic and coding LLMs can be driven by successful trajectories alone, without per-task answers, skills, or feedback formats authored by a designer.
  • Because the composer's interface is agnostic to experience format, the same loop should accept richer sources such as learned skills or codebooks, as the authors state explicitly.
  • At inference, the student is deployed alone; retrieval, the composer, and latent tokens are discarded, so LOPD adds no test-time latency or memory overhead.
  • The margin constraint is not optional: without it or with margins below 0.02, student performance falls below a frozen composer, so real gains require the outcome-weighted privilege check.
  • The training dynamics plot indicates the improvement is concentrated in the first few hundred generations, implying the latent teacher extracts a denser signal from each rollout rather than benefiting from longer training alone.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: because the composer treats the experience source as interchangeable, the same LOPD loop should work with a learned retriever or a skill bank; the marginal value of richer sources could be measured by how often the privileged-margin dual variable rises as source quality varies.
  • Editorial inference: the case study's fragmented token projections suggest that if latent tokens encode procedures, they do so distributively; probing or intervening on individual latent tokens would be needed to verify what the teacher functionally uses.
  • Editorial inference: on domains without a reliable outcome verifier, the margin constraint loses its anchor; a plausible variant would derive the per-token privilege from self-consistency or internal consistency checks instead of environment reward.
  • Editorial inference: LOPD's cold-start distills successful rollouts from the base model itself, so in domains where the base policy rarely succeeds, the experience bank may be too sparse; bootstrapping from synthetic or weaker-policy rollouts could be a necessary extension.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Latent On-Policy Self-Distillation (LOPD), a method for on-policy self-distillation in which the teacher's privileged context is not a hand-crafted artifact but a set of continuous latent tokens produced by a learnable composer from retrieved successful trajectories. The student generates multi-turn trajectories and is trained by reverse-KL distillation against a frozen-backbone teacher conditioned on these latent tokens, while a privileged-margin constraint requires the teacher to maintain a token-level log-probability advantage over the student and an anchor term limits drift from the cold-started composer. The authors report that LOPD outperforms RLVR and several OPSD variants on agentic tool use and code generation across three backbones, achieves the best aggregate result in all ten backbone-benchmark comparisons, and surpasses GRPO and Skill-SD with less than 30% of their rollout budget. They also present ablations showing that joint optimization with a sufficiently large margin is important and that the resulting student behaves differently at inference, suggesting internalization of the teacher's guidance.

Significance. If the empirical claims hold, the paper makes a timely conceptual contribution: it reformulates the privileged context in OPSD as a learnable latent substrate rather than a designer-specified artifact, and it provides a concrete mechanism (the privileged-margin constraint) to keep the learned teacher informative. The method description is clear, the ablations in Figure 3 and Figure 5 are informative, code and model links are provided, and the experimental design otherwise follows standard practice. However, the empirical significance is currently undermined by a model-selection procedure that tunes hyperparameters on the same EnvScaler test set that produces the headline numbers, and by the absence of repeated-seed results or error bars in the main tables. These issues are fixable, but they must be addressed before the central performance claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.3, §4.1, Table 1] The main hyperparameters are selected on the same EnvScaler test set that later produces the headline results. Figure 3 sweeps the margin m by EnvScaler mean reward, Figure 5(a) selects K=32 on EnvScaler reward, and Figure 5(b) selects n_ret=3 on EnvScaler reward; Appendix B.4 states that these evaluations are on the EnvScaler test set. Table 1 then reports EnvScaler as the first main benchmark. This is selection on the test set for the exact metric used to claim the main advantage over GRPO and Skill-SD. The authors should either introduce a separate validation split for hyperparameter selection or use a nested selection procedure, and then re-report Tables 1 and 2 with models selected without access to the test split.
  2. [Tables 1-2, Figure 4] All main results and the training-dynamics curve are single-run point estimates with no error bars, no repeated seeds, and no variance reporting. This is particularly consequential because several claimed wins are small: for example, QWEN3-8B BFCL-v3 is 29.88 vs. 29.00 for GRPO, and QWEN3-4B LiveCodeBench is 48.78 vs. 48.29 for GRPO. Without a measure of run-to-run variability, the statement in §4.2 that LOPD 'obtains the best aggregate result in all ten backbone-benchmark comparisons' is not yet statistically supported. Please report means and standard deviations over at least three independent seeds for the main tables, and ideally for Figure 4 as well.
  3. [§3.3, Eqs. (11)-(13)] The privileged-margin objective assumes that a latent context satisfying the margin constraint exists for the student's visited prefixes throughout training. The cold start and the dual penalty exclude the trivial solution π_T → π_S, but they do not by themselves guarantee that the feasible region is nonempty as the student distribution changes; if the composer cannot produce a margin-satisfying teacher, β grows without bound and the objective degenerates. This is a load-bearing stability assumption for the method. Please report the evolution of Δ(φ) and the dual variable β during training, the fraction of supervised tokens where δ_{t,n} ≥ m, and consider a control with random or deliberately uninformative retrieved experiences to demonstrate that the margin mechanism behaves as described.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title/header] The running header on page 1 reads 'LATENTON-POLICYSELF-DISTILLATION' with missing spaces; this should be fixed.
  2. [Table 1] Several cells in Table 1 appear to have missing whitespace, for example '58.354.4 56.0' in the QWEN3-4B GRPO row; the intended values are presumably 58.3, 54.4, and 56.0.
  3. [Table 3] The 'Base + Composer' column pairs a jointly optimized composer with the unadapted backbone, but the composer was trained to produce context for the student's updated distribution; this is not a clean decomposition and the text should clarify that this column is illustrative rather than a controlled ablation.
  4. [§4.3, Figure 3] The frozen-composer baseline (0.573) is reported for a single seed and the margin sweep is also single-run; adding at least three seeds to this ablation would materially strengthen the central claim that joint optimization with margin is necessary.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

EnvScaler headline is partly a fitted value: margin and latent-capacity hyperparameters are selected on the same held-out test split that later reports LOPD's best EnvScaler scores; the LOPD derivation itself is not circular.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.3 (Figure 3), Section 4.1 'Configurations', Table 1; Appendix B.4]
    "With m≥0.02, the student surpasses the frozen-composer baseline, reaching 0.637 at m=0.05 and 0.626 at m=0.10."

    Appendix B.4 specifies that each row of Figure 3 'evaluates the resulting student on the EnvScaler test set'. Thus m=0.05 is chosen by maximizing EnvScaler test reward, and m=0.05 is then fixed in Section 4.1 for all final LOPD runs, whose EnvScaler entries in Table 1 are 63.7 and 66.4. Similarly, Figure 5(a) selects K=32 and Figure 5(b) n_ret=3 from EnvScaler mean reward on the same split. The reported EnvScaler gains are therefore the selection objective, not an independent prediction; the claims on ACEBench, LiveCodeBench and EvalPlus remain partly independent, so the method's derivation is only partially affected.

full rationale

The core LOPD equations (8)-(13) are not circular: the teacher is a frozen reference copy conditioned on latent context, the student is trained by reverse KL on its own prefixes, and the privilege margin Δ(ϕ) is defined from teacher-minus-student log-probabilities weighted by environment reward, not from the final benchmark score. The composer's cold-start on successful student rollouts is self-referential by design of self-distillation, but that is a property of the paradigm, not a reduction of the output to the input. References to prior work by the same authors (latent memory, Memgen/Vismem) are contextual and not load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported to force the choice. The only concrete circular element is empirical: three hyperparameters (m, K, n_ret) are tuned on the EnvScaler held-out test split (App. B.4), and the same split is then used as the headline benchmark in Table 1. This makes the EnvScaler comparison with GRPO/Skill-SD a fitted value rather than an unbiased prediction, although other-benchmark results and the method's derivation still stand independently. Score 4 reflects one partial fitted-input-called-prediction, not a derivation-level cycle.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces a number of hand-set hyperparameters (m, K, n_ret, lambda, eta_beta) and relies on several domain assumptions about retrieval, teacher informativeness, and outcome rewards. The central empirical claim depends on these choices; several were tuned directly on the EnvScaler test set, which is also the main evaluation benchmark.

free parameters (7)
  • Margin threshold m = 0.05
    Selected from EnvScaler test-set sweep in Figure 3; m=0.02 gives 0.603, m=0.05 gives 0.637, m=0.10 gives 0.626.
  • Latent tokens per experience K = 32
    Selected from EnvScaler test-set sweep in Figure 5(a); K=16 gives 56.3, K=32 gives 63.7, no consistent gain above.
  • Retrieved experiences n_ret = 3
    Selected from EnvScaler/ACEBench test-set sweep in Figure 5(b-e); n_ret=1 gives 60.5, n_ret=3 gives 63.7.
  • Anchor weight lambda = 0.2
    Hand-set in Table 4; no sensitivity reported.
  • Dual step size eta_beta = 0.5
    Hand-set in Table 4; no sensitivity reported.
  • Top-M truncation M = 20
    Following SDPO style for top-M plus tail bucket; not tuned.
  • Cold-start data volume = per domain, unspecified
    Number of training steps and data volume are 'adjusted per domain' (Appendix A.2), not precisely specified.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Dense retriever (Qwen3-Embedding-8B) returns relevant past trajectories under cosine similarity
    Used in Eq. (15)-(16) to construct experience set E; if retrieval quality is low, latent context encodes irrelevant or misleading experience.
  • domain assumption Frozen teacher backbone can carry task-relevant information through learned continuous latent tokens
    The whole objective in Eq. (13) assumes a feasible latent context c_phi exists with teacher advantage over the student; only empirically supported by cold-start and results.
  • domain assumption Outcome reward r(τ) is a reliable verifier for trajectory success
    Used in Eq. (12) to weight the privilege margin; for coding it is binary pass@all tests, for EnvScaler a continuous subtask fraction.
  • standard math Top-M-plus-tail approximation preserves enough distributional signal for reverse-KL distillation
    Eq. (9) truncates teacher and student distributions; the tail is aggregated into one bucket, which is exact for the divergence only if the tail mass is small.
  • ad hoc to paper Cold-start on the base model's own successful rollouts yields an informative initial composer
    Eq. (14) initializes phi via SFT on successful trajectories; the paper provides no guarantee that this cold-start is sufficient beyond the reported experiments.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Latent On-Policy Self-Distillation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QXXXKLXK

@misc{pith2026260813040,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Latent On-Policy Self-Distillation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QXXXKLXK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.13040}
}
read the original abstract

Enabling agents to learn from experience and internalize it into their policy has become a central problem in self-evolving AI. On-policy self-distillation (OPSD) offers an effective pathway by using a privileged self-teacher to provide dense supervision on the student's own trajectories; however, existing methods still rely heavily on designer-specified privileged artifacts (e.g., answers, feedback, skills, or trajectories), limiting the end-to-end learnability and scalability required for continual self-improvement. In this work, we introduce Latent On-Policy Self-Distillation (LOPD), which, rather than proposing another hand-crafted OPSD variant with a newly prescribed form of privileged context, makes the teacher's privileged context itself learnable end-to-end from experience. Technically, LOPD retrieves relevant experiences and composes them into continuous latent tokens that condition a self-teacher, while the student generates trajectories from the task and interaction history and receives dense token-level supervision at every visited prefix. We further introduce a privileged-margin objective to stabilize and regulate the learning of latent context. Empirically, LOPD demonstrates (I) strong performance, outperforming RLVR and representative OPSD methods including OPSD, SDPO, and Skill-SD across both agentic tool use and code generation; and (II) high learning efficiency, surpassing GRPO and Skill-SD with less than 30% of their rollout budget. Ablation studies further provide direct evidence that making privileged context learnable is necessary for realizing these gains. Together, these results position LOPD as a step toward a more scalable and self-directed paradigm for agent evolution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.13040 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. From fixed to learnable privileged context. Existing OPSD methods condition the self￾teacher on designer-specified answers, skills, or trajectories. LOPD instead learns latent context from prior experience and distills its dense supervision into the same on-policy student. Insights/tips illustrate compatible sources; LOPD instantiates the substrate using trajectories only. ternal model. This design shifts the centra… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of LOPD. The student generates on-policy trajectories from the task and inter￾action history. A fixed-backbone teacher re-evaluates the same prefixes with latent context composed from retrieved experiences, and reverse-KL distillation matches their top-M-plus-tail distributions. this context is obtained from some experience source E by a fixed transformation: cfix = Φfix(x, E), πT θ (· | st, cfix) = πθ(· | … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. EnvScaler training dynamics. Mean reward over 1,600 rollouts. 4.3 FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.62 0.64 Frozen φ₀ 0.573 m = 0 0.551 m = 0.01 0.566 m = 0.02 0.603 m = 0.05 0.637 m = 0.10 0.626 m = 0.20 0.613 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Effect of joint optimization. EnvScaler Mean Reward EnvScaler performance across margins. Effect of Joint Optimization. Does joint optimization actually produce a better privileged context, or merely in￾troduce additional trainable parameters? This is the cen￾tral abla…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Sensitivity analysis. Performance of the resulting student without privileged context. (a) Latent-token capacity. (b) EnvScaler reward and (c–e) ACEBench aggregate, multi-step, and multi￾turn scores as the training-time retrieval count varies. Dashed lines mark the def…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Representative latent decoding examples. Each row pairs a current task with a struc￾turally related rank-2 retrieval and excerpts from LM-head projections of 32 latent tokens, with and without task conditioning. The projections remain fragmented and do not reproduce th…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Latent reasoning with supervised thinking states, 2026

    Ido Amos, Avi Caciularu, Mor Geva, Amir Globerson, Jonathan Herzig, Lior Shani, and Idan Szpektor. Latent reasoning with supervised thinking states, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.08332

    arXiv 2026

  2. [3]

    Acebench: Who wins the match point in tool usage?, 2025

    Chen Chen, Xinlong Hao, Weiwen Liu, Xu Huang, Xingshan Zeng, Shuai Yu, Dexun Li, Shuai Wang, Weinan Gan, Yuefeng Huang, Wulong Liu, Xinzhi Wang, Defu Lian, Baoqun Yin, Yasheng Wang, and Wu Liu. Acebench: Who wins the match point in tool usage?, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12851

    arXiv 2025

  3. [4]

    Llm latent reasoning as chain of superposition, 2026

    Jingcheng Deng, Liang Pang, Zihao Wei, Shicheng Xu, Zenghao Duan, Kun Xu, Yang Song, Huawei Shen, and Xueqi Cheng. Llm latent reasoning as chain of superposition, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.15522

    arXiv 2026

  4. [5]

    Elasticmem: Latent memory as a learnable resource for llm agents, 2026

    Tao Feng, Chongrui Ye, Tianyang Luo, Jingjun Xu, Xueqiang Xu, Haozhen Zhang, Ge Liu, and Jiaxuan You. Elasticmem: Latent memory as a learnable resource for llm agents, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.30690

    arXiv 2026

  5. [7]

    Training large language models to reason in a continuous latent space, 2025

    Shibo Hao, Sainbayar Sukhbaatar, DiJia Su, Xian Li, Zhiting Hu, Jason Weston, and Yuandong Tian. Training large language models to reason in a continuous latent space, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.06769

    arXiv 2025

  6. [9]

    Flashmem: Distilling intrinsic latent memory via computation reuse, 2026

    Yubo Hou, Zhisheng Chen, Tao Wan, and Zengchang Qin. Flashmem: Distilling intrinsic latent memory via computation reuse, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.05505

    arXiv 2026

  7. [10]

    u botter, Frederike L \

    Jonas H \"u botter, Frederike L \"u beck, Lejs Behric, Anton Baumann, Marco Bagatella, Daniel Marta, Ido Hakimi, Idan Shenfeld, Thomas Kleine Buening, Carlos Guestrin, and Andreas Krause. Reinforcement learning via self-distillation, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.20802

    arXiv 2026

  8. [11]

    LiveCodeBench : Holistic and contamination free evaluation of large language models for code

    Naman Jain, King Han, Alex Gu, Wen-Ding Li, Fanjia Yan, Tianjun Zhang, Sida Wang, Armando Solar-Lezama, Koushik Sen, and Ion Stoica. LiveCodeBench : Holistic and contamination free evaluation of large language models for code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07974, 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 81 references
  1. [13]

    Edge-opd: Internalizing privileged context with evidence guided on-policy distillation, 2026

    Aristotelis Lazaridis, Dylan Bates, Aman Sharma, Brian King, Vincent Lu, and Jack FitzGerald. Edge-opd: Internalizing privileged context with evidence guided on-policy distillation, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.23493

    2026 arXiv

  2. [15]

    Rethinking on-policy distillation of large language models: Phenomenology, mechanism, and recipe, 2026 b

    Yaxuan Li, Yuxin Zuo, Bingxiang He, Jinqian Zhang, Chaojun Xiao, Cheng Qian, Tianyu Yu, Huan ang Gao, Wenkai Yang, Zhiyuan Liu, and Ning Ding. Rethinking on-policy distillation of large language models: Phenomenology, mechanism, and recipe, 2026 b . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2...

    2026 arXiv

  3. [16]

    Is your code generated by chatgpt really correct? rigorous evaluation of large language models for code generation, 2023

    Jiawei Liu, Chunqiu Steven Xia, Yuyao Wang, and Lingming Zhang. Is your code generated by chatgpt really correct? rigorous evaluation of large language models for code generation, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.01210

    2023 arXiv

  4. [18]

    Team Olmo, :, Allyson Ettinger, Amanda Bertsch, Bailey Kuehl, David Graham, David Heineman, Dirk Groeneveld, Faeze Brahman, Finbarr Timbers, Hamish Ivison, Jacob Morrison, Jake Poznanski, Kyle Lo, Luca Soldaini, Matt Jordan, Mayee Chen, Michael Noukhovitch, Nathan Lambert, Pet...

    2026 arXiv

  5. [20]

    Gonzalez

    Shishir G Patil, Huanzhi Mao, Fanjia Yan, Charlie Cheng-Jie Ji, Vishnu Suresh, Ion Stoica, and Joseph E. Gonzalez. The berkeley function calling leaderboard ( BFCL ): From tool use to agentic evaluation of large language models. In Forty-second International Conference on Mach...

    2025

  6. [21]

    Privileged information distillation for language models, 2026

    Emiliano Penaloza, Dheeraj Vattikonda, Nicolas Gontier, Alexandre Lacoste, Laurent Charlin, and Massimo Caccia. Privileged information distillation for language models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.04942

    2026 arXiv

  7. [23]

    Self-distillation enables continual learning, 2026

    Idan Shenfeld, Mehul Damani, Jonas Hübotter, and Pulkit Agrawal. Self-distillation enables continual learning, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.19897

    2026 arXiv

  8. [24]

    A survey of on-policy distillation for large language models, 2026

    Mingyang Song and Mao Zheng. A survey of on-policy distillation for large language models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.00626

    2026 arXiv

  9. [25]

    Envscaler: Scaling tool-interactive environments for llm agent via programmatic synthesis, 2026

    Xiaoshuai Song, Haofei Chang, Guanting Dong, Yutao Zhu, Ji-Rong Wen, and Zhicheng Dou. Envscaler: Scaling tool-interactive environments for llm agent via programmatic synthesis, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.05808

    2026 arXiv

  10. [26]

    D eep C oder: A F ully O pen- S ource 14 B C oder at O 3-mini L evel --- together.ai

    TogetherAI. D eep C oder: A F ully O pen- S ource 14 B C oder at O 3-mini L evel --- together.ai. https://www.together.ai/blog/deepcoder, 2025

    2025

  11. [27]

    Skill-sd: Skill-conditioned self-distillation for multi-turn llm agents, 2026

    Hao Wang, Guozhi Wang, Han Xiao, Yufeng Zhou, Yue Pan, Jichao Wang, Ke Xu, Yafei Wen, Xiaohu Ruan, Xiaoxin Chen, and Honggang Qi. Skill-sd: Skill-conditioned self-distillation for multi-turn llm agents, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.10674

    2026 arXiv

  12. [28]

    Memoryllm: Towards self-updatable large language models, 2024

    Yu Wang, Yifan Gao, Xiusi Chen, Haoming Jiang, Shiyang Li, Jingfeng Yang, Qingyu Yin, Zheng Li, Xian Li, Bing Yin, Jingbo Shang, and Julian McAuley. Memoryllm: Towards self-updatable large language models, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.04624

    2024 arXiv

  13. [30]

    Tokmem: One-token procedural memory for large language models, 2026 b

    Zijun Wu, Yongchang Hao, and Lili Mou. Tokmem: One-token procedural memory for large language models, 2026 b . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.00444

    2026

  14. [32]

    Self-distilled rlvr, 2026

    Chenxu Yang, Chuanyu Qin, Qingyi Si, Minghui Chen, Naibin Gu, Dingyu Yao, Zheng Lin, Weiping Wang, Jiaqi Wang, and Nan Duan. Self-distilled rlvr, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03128

    2026 arXiv

  15. [33]

    On-policy context distillation for language models, 2026

    Tianzhu Ye, Li Dong, Xun Wu, Shaohan Huang, and Furu Wei. On-policy context distillation for language models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.12275

    2026 arXiv

  16. [35]

    The latent space: Foundation, evolution, mechanism, ability, and outlook, 2026 b

    Xinlei Yu, Zhangquan Chen, Yongbo He, Tianyu Fu, Guanting Dong, Cheng Yang, Chengming Xu, Yue Ma, Xiaobin Hu, Zhe Cao, Jie Xu, Guibin Zhang, Jiale Tao, Jiayi Zhang, Siyuan Ma, Kaituo Feng, Haojie Huang, Youxing Li, Ronghao Chen, Huacan Wang, Chenglin Wu, Zikun Su, Xiaogang Xu,...

    2026 arXiv

  17. [37]

    Vismem: Latent vision memory unlocks potential of vision-language models, 2026 d

    Xinlei Yu, Chengming Xu, Guibin Zhang, Zhangquan Chen, Yudong Zhang, Yongbo He, Peng-Tao Jiang, Jiangning Zhang, Xiaobin Hu, and Shuicheng Yan. Vismem: Latent vision memory unlocks potential of vision-language models, 2026 d . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.11007

    2026

  18. [39]

    Memgen: Weaving generative latent memory for self-evolving agents, 2025

    Guibin Zhang, Muxin Fu, and Shuicheng Yan. Memgen: Weaving generative latent memory for self-evolving agents, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.24704

    2025

  19. [43]

    Self-distilled reasoner: On-policy self-distillation for large language models, 2026

    Siyan Zhao, Zhihui Xie, Mengchen Liu, Jing Huang, Guan Pang, Feiyu Chen, and Aditya Grover. Self-distilled reasoner: On-policy self-distillation for large language models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18734

    2026 arXiv

  20. [44]

    A survey on latent reasoning, 2025

    Rui-Jie Zhu, Tianhao Peng, Tianhao Cheng, Xingwei Qu, Jinfa Huang, Dawei Zhu, Hao Wang, Kaiwen Xue, Xuanliang Zhang, Yong Shan, Tianle Cai, Taylor Kergan, Assel Kembay, Andrew Smith, Chenghua Lin, Binh Nguyen, Yuqi Pan, Yuhong Chou, Zefan Cai, Zhenhe Wu, Yongchi Zhao, Tianyu L...

    2025 arXiv

  21. [45]

    Scaling Learning Algorithms Towards

    Bengio, Yoshua and LeCun, Yann , booktitle =. Scaling Learning Algorithms Towards

  22. [46]

    and Osindero, Simon and Teh, Yee Whye , journal =

    Hinton, Geoffrey E. and Osindero, Simon and Teh, Yee Whye , journal =. A Fast Learning Algorithm for Deep Belief Nets , volume =

  23. [47]

    TogetherAI , title =

  24. [48]

    2026 , eprint=

    Self-Distillation Enables Continual Learning , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  25. [49]

    2025 , eprint=

    ACEBench: Who Wins the Match Point in Tool Usage? , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  26. [50]

    2023 , eprint=

    Is Your Code Generated by ChatGPT Really Correct? Rigorous Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code Generation , author=. 2023 , eprint=

    2023

  27. [51]

    2026 , eprint=

    Olmo 3 , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  28. [52]

    2016 , publisher=

    Deep learning , author=. 2016 , publisher=

    2016

  29. [53]

    2024 , eprint=

    On-Policy Distillation of Language Models: Learning from Self-Generated Mistakes , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    2024

  30. [54]

    2026 , eprint=

    A Survey of On-Policy Distillation for Large Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  31. [55]

    2026 , eprint=

    Rethinking On-Policy Distillation of Large Language Models: Phenomenology, Mechanism, and Recipe , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  32. [56]

    2026 , eprint=

    Self-Distilled Reasoner: On-Policy Self-Distillation for Large Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  33. [57]

    2026 , eprint=

    Reinforcement Learning via Self-Distillation , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  34. [58]

    2026 , eprint=

    Privileged Information Distillation for Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  35. [59]

    2026 , eprint=

    Self-Distilled RLVR , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  36. [60]

    2026 , eprint=

    On-Policy Context Distillation for Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  37. [61]

    2026 , eprint=

    EDGE-OPD: Internalizing Privileged Context with Evidence Guided On-Policy Distillation , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  38. [62]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.07079 , year =

    Woogyeol Jin and Taywon Min and Yongjin Yang and Swanand Ravindra Kadhe and Yi Zhou and Dennis Wei and Nathalie Baracaldo and Kimin Lee , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.07079 , year =

    arXiv

  39. [63]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.25562 , year =

    Yuqian Fu and Haohuan Huang and Kaiwen Jiang and Jiacai Liu and Zhuo Jiang and Yuanheng Zhu and Dongbin Zhao , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.25562 , year =

    arXiv

  40. [64]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.13010 , year =

    Yecheng Wu and Song Han and Han Cai , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.13010 , year =

    arXiv

  41. [65]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.17535 , year =

    Xinsen Zhang and Zhenkai Ding and Tianjun Pan and Run Yang and Chun Kang and Xue Xiong and Jingnan Gu , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.17535 , year =

    arXiv

  42. [66]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.02994 , year =

    Jiaze Li and Hao Yin and Haoran Xu and Boshen Xu and Wenhui Tan and Zewen He and Jianzhong Ju and Zhenbo Luo and Jian Luan , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.02994 , year =

    arXiv

  43. [67]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24596 , year =

    Di Cao and Dongjie Fu and Hai Yu and Siqi Zheng and Xu Tan and Tao Jin , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24596 , year =

  44. [68]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.00642 , year =

    Yan Zhang and Daiqing Wu and Huawen Shen and Yu Zhou and Can Ma , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.00642 , year =

    arXiv

  45. [69]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.18740 , year =

    Qianhao Yuan and Jie Lou and Xing Yu and Hongyu Lin and Le Sun and Xianpei Han and Yaojie Lu , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.18740 , year =

    arXiv

  46. [70]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.21924 , year =

    Ruiqi Liu and Xiaolei Lv and Gengsheng Li and Ximo Zhu and Zhiheng Wang and Zhengbo Zhang and Junkai Chen and Zhiheng Li and Bo Li and Jun Gao and Shu Wu , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.21924 , year =

    arXiv

  47. [71]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.12002 , year =

    Yinghui He and Simran Kaur and Adithya Bhaskar and Yongjin Yang and Jiarui Liu and Narutatsu Ri and Liam Fowl and Abhishek Panigrahi and Danqi Chen and Sanjeev Arora , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.12002 , year =

    arXiv

  48. [72]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.12652 , year =

    Weichen Yu and Xiaomin Li and Yizhou Zhao and Xiaoze Liu and Ruowang Zhang and Haixin Wang and Yinyi Luo and Chen Henry Wu and Gaurav Mittal and Matt Fredrikson and Yu Hu , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.12652 , year =

    arXiv

  49. [73]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.12741 , year =

    Yuwei Zhang and Sha Li and Changlong Yu and Qin Lu and Shuowei Jin and Chengyu Dong and Haoran Liu and Ilgee Hong and Xintong Li and Zhenyu Shi and Bing Yin and Jingbo Shang , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.12741 , year =

    arXiv

  50. [74]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.11709 , year =

    Leyi Pan and Shuchang Tao and Yunpeng Zhai and Lingzhe Zhang and Zhaoyang Liu and Bolin Ding and Aiwei Liu and Lijie Wen , title =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.11709 , year =

    arXiv

  51. [75]

    2025 , eprint=

    A Survey on Latent Reasoning , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  52. [76]

    2025 , eprint=

    MemGen: Weaving Generative Latent Memory for Self-Evolving Agents , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  53. [77]

    2026 , eprint=

    TokMem: One-Token Procedural Memory for Large Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  54. [78]

    2026 , eprint=

    FlashMem: Distilling Intrinsic Latent Memory via Computation Reuse , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  55. [79]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.30626 , year=

    DOPD: Dual On-policy Distillation , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.30626 , year=

    arXiv

  56. [80]

    2026 , eprint=

    ElasticMem: Latent Memory as a Learnable Resource for LLM Agents , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  57. [81]

    2024 , eprint=

    MEMORYLLM: Towards Self-Updatable Large Language Models , author=. 2024 , eprint=

    2024

  58. [82]

    2026 , eprint=

    VisMem: Latent Vision Memory Unlocks Potential of Vision-Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  59. [83]

    2026 , eprint=

    Latent Reasoning with Supervised Thinking States , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  60. [84]

    2025 , eprint=

    Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  61. [85]

    2026 , eprint=

    LLM Latent Reasoning as Chain of Superposition , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  62. [86]

    2026 , eprint=

    The Latent Space: Foundation, Evolution, Mechanism, Ability, and Outlook , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  63. [87]

    2026 , eprint=

    EnvScaler: Scaling Tool-Interactive Environments for LLM Agent via Programmatic Synthesis , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  64. [88]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09388 , year=

    Qwen3 technical report , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09388 , year=

    arXiv

  65. [89]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19786 , year=

    Gemma 3 technical report , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19786 , year=

    arXiv

  66. [90]

    Jain, Naman and Han, King and Gu, Alex and Li, Wen-Ding and Yan, Fanjia and Zhang, Tianjun and Wang, Sida and Solar-Lezama, Armando and Sen, Koushik and Stoica, Ion , journal=

  67. [91]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.04694 , year=

    Encompassing Diversity and Complexity in Code Generation , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.04694 , year=

  68. [92]

    Gonzalez , booktitle=

    Shishir G Patil and Huanzhi Mao and Fanjia Yan and Charlie Cheng-Jie Ji and Vishnu Suresh and Ion Stoica and Joseph E. Gonzalez , booktitle=. The Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (. 2025 , url=

    2025

  69. [93]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12045 , year=

    tau-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.12045 , year=

    arXiv

  70. [94]

    2025 , eprint=

    AgentDistill: Training-Free Agent Distillation with Generalizable MCP Boxes , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  71. [95]

    2026 , eprint=

    Skill-SD: Skill-Conditioned Self-Distillation for Multi-turn LLM Agents , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  72. [96]

    2026 , eprint=

    Self-Supervised On-Policy Distillation for Reasoning Language Models , author=. 2026 , eprint=

    2026

  73. [97]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300 , year=

    Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reasoning in open language models , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300 , year=

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.