Backtracking When It Strays: Mitigating Dual Exposure Biases in LLM Reasoning Distillation
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:Backtracking When It Strays: Mitigating Dual Exposure Biases in LLM Reasoning Distillation
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in complex reasoning tasks via long chain-of-thought (CoT), yet their immense computational overhead hinders real-world deployment. LLM reasoning distillation addresses this by transferring reasoning capabilities from formidable teacher models to compact student models. However, existing distillation paradigms face a fundamental dilemma. Typical off-policy distillation strictly utilizes teacher-generated golden trajectories, suffering from an exposure bias due to the mismatch between training distributions and student-generated inference contexts, which leads to error cascades in long CoT reasoning. To address this, on-policy distillation allows students to explore their own trajectories, but we demonstrate that it inherently introduces a reciprocal reversed exposure bias: the teacher model also struggles to provide positive guidance when conditioned on student-generated sub-optimal contexts. To resolve this dual exposure biases problem, we propose Monitoring Trajectories and Backtracking when it strays (MOTAB), a new LLM reasoning distillation pipeline. Specifically, MOTAB dynamically monitors the student's on-policy generation against an adaptive safety boundary. When the generation strays and exceeds this threshold, MOTAB backtracks to the last safe state and leverages teacher intervention to correct the course. This approach inherently tolerates minor student errors to mitigate exposure bias, while preventing sub-optimal contexts to circumvent reversed exposure bias. Extensive experiments on the LIMO-v2 and AceReason datasets demonstrate that MOTAB effectively alleviates the dual exposure biases, yielding a roughly 3% average performance improvement in reasoning tasks.
| Comments: | 26 pages, 8 figures |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.19433 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2605.19433v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.19433
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
The Annotation Scarcity Paradox in Low-Resource NLP Evaluation: A Decade of Acceleration and Emerging Constraints
May 20
-
Benchmarking Commercial ASR Systems on Code-Switching Speech: Arabic, Persian, and German
May 20
-
ReacTOD: Bounded Neuro-Symbolic Agentic NLU for Zero-Shot Dialogue State Tracking
May 20
-
Agent Meltdowns: The Road to Hell Is Paved with Helpful Agents
May 20
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.