Artificial Intelligence · 24.08.2026, 09:31 UTC
Scale or Reason? A Compute-Equivalent Analysis of Reasoning Distillation
| Schweregrad | info |
|---|---|
| Kategorie | Artificial Intelligence |
| Quelle | arXiv cs.CL ↗ |
| Veröffentlicht | 24.08.2026 UTC |
Sicherheitsmeldung mit Schweregrad noch nicht bewertet. Technische Details im Tab „Originaltext“; empfohlene Schritte in der Checkliste.
arXiv:2509.22193v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Distilling reasoning traces from strong teacher models has become the standard recipe for building capable small language models. Yet reasoning traces are 5-20$\times$ longer than standard instruction fine-tuning (IFT) outputs, meaning every practitioner who chooses reasoning distillation implicitly forgoes training a larger IFT model on the same compute budget. Whether this trade-off is worthwhile remains unaddressed. We study it with a controlled experiment: a single teacher generates paired IFT and reasoning outputs for identical prompts by toggling only its reasoning mode, isolating supervision format as the sole variable. Training students at five scales (0.5B to 14B) and evaluating on 18 benchmarks, we find that at matched FLOPs, IFT lies on or near the Pareto frontier across the majority of configurations. Reasoning reaches the Pareto frontier only on open-ended tasks at 7B and above. Even there, a sequential curriculum mixing just 25-50\% reasoning data with IFT captures most of the accuracy benefit at far lower compute cost.
Maßnahmen
⬇ Als MarkdownVerwandte Beiträge
- info Best GPU Neoclouds 2026: CoreWeave, Nebius, Lambda, Crusoe, and Groq Ranked by Published Pricing and Contracted Power
- info The Voiceprint Fallacy: Why Voices Are Not Unique Biometric Imprints
- info Human-Level Text-to-SQL via Reinforcement Learning on Verified Data, Without Pipeline Engineering
- info Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks