CLDec 4, 2025
LLMs Know More Than Words: A Genre Study with Syntax, Metaphor & PhoneticsWeiye Shi, Zhaowei Zhang, Shaoheng Yan et al.
Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable potential across diverse language related tasks, yet whether they capture deeper linguistic properties, such as syntactic structure, phonetic cues, and metrical patterns from raw text remains unclear. To analysis whether LLMs can learn these features effectively and apply them to important nature language related tasks, we introduce a novel multilingual genre classification dataset derived from Project Gutenberg, a large-scale digital library offering free access to thousands of public domain literary works, comprising thousands of sentences per binary task (poetry vs. novel;drama vs. poetry;drama vs. novel) in six languages (English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese). We augment each with three explicit linguistic feature sets (syntactic tree structures, metaphor counts, and phonetic metrics) to evaluate their impact on classification performance. Experiments demonstrate that although LLM classifiers can learn latent linguistic structures either from raw text or from explicitly provided features, different features contribute unevenly across tasks, which underscores the importance of incorporating more complex linguistic signals during model training.
52.0AIMay 11
The Many Faces of On-Policy Distillation: Pitfalls, Mechanisms, and FixesSiqi Zhu, Xuyan Ye, Hongyu Lu et al.
On-policy distillation (OPD) and on-policy self-distillation (OPSD) have emerged as promising post-training methods for large language models, offering dense token-level supervision on trajectories sampled from the model's own policy. However, existing results on their effectiveness remain mixed: while OP(S)D has shown promise in system prompt and knowledge internalization, recent studies also report instability and degradation. In this work, we present a comprehensive empirical study of when OPD and OPSD work, when they fail, and why. We find that OPD on mathematical reasoning is highly sensitive to teacher choice and loss formulation, whereas OPSD fails in our tested settings due to test-time absence of instance-specific privileged information (PI). In contrast, OPSD is effective when PI represents a shared latent rule, such as a system prompt or alignment preference. We identify three failure mechanisms: (1) distribution mismatch between teacher and student caused by conditioning on student-generated prefixes, (2) optimization instability from biased TopK reverse-KL gradients, and (3) an OPSD-specific limitation where the student learns a PI-free policy that aggregates PI-conditioned teachers, which is insufficient when PI is instance-specific. We further show that stop-gradient TopK objectives, RLVR-adapted teachers, and SFT-stabilized students mitigate these failures.