Trace-of-Thought Prompting: Investigating Prompt-Based Knowledge Distillation Through Question Decomposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge distillation allows smaller neural networks to emulate the performance of larger, teacher models with reduced computational demands.Traditional methods for Large Language Models (LLMs) often necessitate extensive fine-tuning, which limits their accessibility.To address this, we introduce Trace-of-Thought Prompting, a novel framework designed to distill critical reasoning capabilities from largescale teacher models (over 8 billion parameters) to small-scale student models (up to 8 billion parameters).This approach leverages problem decomposition to enhance interpretability and facilitate human-in-the-loop interventions.Empirical evaluations on the GSM8K and MATH datasets show that student models achieve accuracy gains of up to 113% on GSM8K and 20% on MATH, with significant improvements particularly notable in smaller models like Llama 2 and Zephyr.Our results suggest a promising pathway for open-source, small-scale models to eventually serve as both students and teachers, potentially reducing our reliance on large-scale, proprietary models.Our code, featuring data analytics and testing scripts, is provided here.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.108 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".