Logic Distillation: Learning from Code Function by Function for Decision-making Tasks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have garnered increasing attention owing to their powerful comprehension and generation capabilities. Generally, larger LLMs (L-LLMs) that require paid interfaces exhibit significantly superior performance compared to smaller LLMs (S-LLMs) that can be deployed on a variety of devices. Knowledge distillation (KD) aims to empower S-LLMs with the capabilities of L-LLMs, while S-LLMs merely mimic the outputs of L-LLMs, failing to get the powerful decision-making capability for new situations. Consequently, S-LLMs are helpless when it comes to continuous decision-making tasks that require logical reasoning. To tackle the identified challenges, we propose a novel framework called Logic Distillation (LD). Initially, LD employs L-LLMs to instantiate complex instructions into discrete functions and illustrates their usage to establish a function base. Subsequently, LD fine-tunes S-LLMs based on the function base to learn the logic employed by L-LLMs in decision-making. During testing, S-LLMs will yield decision-making outcomes, function by function, based on current states. Experiments demonstrate that with the assistance of LD, S-LLMs can achieve outstanding results in continuous decision-making tasks, comparable to, or even surpassing, those of L-LLMs. The code and data for the proposed method are provided for research purposes https://github.com/Anfeather/Logic-Distillation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".