The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Small Models Struggle to Learn from Strong Reasoners
Open accessAbstract
Large language models (LLMs) excel in complex reasoning tasks, and distilling their reasoning capabilities into smaller models has shown promise. However, we uncover an interesting phenomenon, which we term the Small Model Learnability Gap: small models ($\leq$3B parameters) do not consistently benefit from long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning or distillation from larger models. Instead, they perform better when fine-tuned on shorter, simpler reasoning chains that better align with their intrinsic learning capacity. To address this, we propose Mix Distillation, a simple yet effective strategy that balances reasoning complexity by combining long and short CoT examples or reasoning from both larger and smaller models. Our experiments demonstrate that Mix Distillation significantly improves small model reasoning performance compared to training on either data alone. These findings highlight the limitations of direct strong model distillation and underscore the importance of adapting reasoning complexity for effective reasoning capability transfer.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Blending long and short CoT reasoning examples improves the effectiveness of knowledge distillation from LLMs to SLMs.
“Both [93] and [23] explored mixed distillation, with [93] blending long and short CoT reasoning examples, while [23] combined CoT and PoT (Program of Thought) to improve the effectiveness of knowledge distillation from LLMs to SLMs on specific tasks.”
From Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models (2025) · cites this paper as [93]
There is a Small Model Learnability Gap: SLMs struggle to emulate the reasoning depth of their larger counterparts.
“However, [93] finds a phenomenon named Small Model Learnability Gap , which highlights the challenges of distilling complex reasoning processes from large model to small model, showing that SLMs struggle to emulate the reasoning depth of their larger counterparts.”
From Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models (2025) · cites this paper as [93]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models
Sui, Y., Chuang, Y.-N., Wang, G., Zhang, J., Zhang, T., Yuan, J., Liu, H., Wen, A., Zhong, S., Zou, N., et al. (2025) · arXiv · Cited by 517
“However, [46] finds a phenomenon named Small Model Learnability Gap , which highlights the challenges of distilling complex reasoning processes from large model to small model, showing that SLMs struggle to emulate the reasoning depth of their larger counterparts.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, Y., Yue, X., Xu, Z., Jiang, F., Niu, L., Lin, B. Y., Ramasubramanian, B., & Poovendran, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- Pages
- 25366-25394
- arXiv
- 2502.12143
- OpenAlex
- W4412944484
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5
- FWCI
- 4.74
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (2229876)
- U.S. Department of Homeland Security
- Office of Naval Research (FA9550)
- Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550-, FA9550-23-1-0208)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- knowledge distillation, chain-of-thought reasoning, reasoning complexity, large language models, small language models
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review