Evidence record 18327 · automatically gathered

Learning from Consensus and Disagreement: Unsupervised On-Policy Self-Distillation with Minority-Trajectory Contrast

On-policy self-distillation improves language-model reasoning by querying a teacher on states actually visited by the student. Recent methods create a powerful information asymmetry by exposing the teacher to privileged context, yet they fundamentally rely on external supervision---such as gold solutions or verifiers---to construct this advantage. We introduce CoDA (Consensus and Disagreement Alignment), a fully unsupervised framework that creates reliable privileged information entirely from th

Record details

Published: 9 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.LG
Category: Research
Topics: Regulation · Safety & alignment · Children & education
Retrieved: 11 August 2026

source-onlyevidence status

These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.

How to cite this record

ethics.ai (9 August 2026), “Learning from Consensus and Disagreement: Unsupervised On-Policy Self-Distillation with Minority-Trajectory Contrast,” evidence record 18327, https://ethics.ai/record/18327 (originally published by arXiv cs.LG).

JSON

Use and limitations

This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.