SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2608.27857

SpikeOPD: Stable On-Policy Distillation for Autoregressive Spiking Language Models

Abstract

Spiking neural networks (SNNs) offer a path to energy-efficient language modeling through sparse encoding and event-driven computation, but training capable spiking language models from scratch remains difficult. A practical alternative is ANN-to-SNN migration through knowledge distillation (KD), where a pretrained artificial neural network (ANN) teacher supervises an SNN student. Existing migration approaches distill on fixed corpus prefixes, whereas autoregressive inference conditions on self-generated prefixes, creating prefix-source mismatch. It manifests as output-policy mismatch with the ANN teacher and internal spiking-dynamics drift between self-generated and matched corpus prefixes. On-policy distillation (OPD) offers a natural way to mitigate both manifestations by continuing teacher supervision on self-generated prefixes. We evaluate a teacher-only full-KL variant, Vanilla OPD, via a controlled stress test and observe it may suffer from delayed rollout-feedback collapse. This result shows that on-policy coverage alone does not ensure stable adaptation. Motivated by these findings, we propose SpikeOPD, a stable on-policy distillation framework for autoregressive SNNs that learns from self-generated prefixes while maintaining rollout stability. It applies full-KL teacher correction to reduce output-policy mismatch, while matched-prefix policy anchoring constrains policy departure from the frozen reference SNN on the same prefixes. Layerwise spike regularization further limits firing-rate deviations during on-policy adaptation. Across three model scales, SpikeOPD improves average accuracy over the corresponding KD SNNs by 0.8, 1.7, and 2.9 points at 0.125B, 0.35B, and 1.3B, respectively, while preserving their sparse-compute profiles.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Enqiao Lu, Xingrui Yu, Yiwei Fu, Zhenglin Wan, Pengfei Zhou, Wangbo Zhao, Muqing Jian, Xueyi Zhang, Yang You, Ivor Tsang. 2026-08-28. SpikeOPD: Stable On-Policy Distillation for Autoregressive Spiking Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.27857

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

One AI Signal, Many Human Judgments: A Bayesian Cascade Analysis of AI-based Credibility Indicators in Online Information Spread

Social media platforms increasingly use AI-based credibility indicators to help users judge misinformation. Unlike individual human-AI decision-making, these indicators are embedded in information spread: users see both an AI prediction and earlier judgments shaped by the same AI, and their own judgments may then enter the public history. Yet how to analytically characterize this process remains under-explored. We therefore introduce a social-learning lens for this setting by extending the classical Bayesian cascade model with the AI indicator as a shared public signal. The resulting Gateway condition compares the evidence from the AI prediction with users' private impressions. Through this view, we show that AI changes what public history means. Crowd agreement may reflect accumulated independent human evidence, or repeated dependence on the same AI prediction. This creates a preservation-correction trade-off: stronger reliance on AI can preserve correct predictions, but can also lock in incorrect ones by blocking corrective private impressions. We calibrate the model using human-subject data on news veracity judgments. Although the AI outperforms human users, the average user weights it below her own impression but above several peer judgments, while individual users vary from discounting the AI to relying on it enough to cascade. Simulations show that over-reliance on a weak AI is especially harmful, and that diversifying AI signals across users can better keep the crowd informative. We conclude with implications for understanding human-AI interaction in information spread and designing misinformation interventions.

cs.HC

"An Endless Stream of AI Slop": How Developers Discuss the Burden of AI-Assisted Software Development

"AI slop", that is, low-quality AI-generated content, is increasingly affecting software development, from generated code and pull requests to documentation and bug reports. However, there is limited empirical research on how developers perceive and respond to this phenomenon. We qualitatively analyzed how developers discuss AI slop in 1,154 Reddit and Hacker News posts, developing a codebook of 15 codes organized into three thematic clusters: Review Friction (how AI slop burdens reviewers, erodes trust, and prompts countermeasures), Quality Degradation (damage to codebases, knowledge resources, and developer competence), and Forces and Consequences (systemic incentives, mandated adoption, craft erosion, and workforce disruption). Our findings frame AI slop as a tragedy of the commons, where individual productivity gains externalize costs onto reviewers, maintainers, and the broader community. We report the concerns developers raise and the mitigation strategies they propose, with implications for tool developers, team leads, and educators.

cs.SE

AI Writers Have a Consistent Stylometric Footprint, but AI Editors Do Not

Text generated by large language models (LLMs) has been shown to be stylometrically distinct from human-written text \citep{andreDetectingAIAuthorship2023, shahDetectingUnmaskingAIGenerated2023, oparaStyloAIDistinguishingAIGenerated2024, soto2024fewshot, liLinguisticDifferencesAI2025, selviogluFeatureExtractionAnalysis2025}. But LLMs are increasingly used not only to generate text but also to edit human writing, and it is unclear whether the two leave the same trace. We show that AI generation leaves a consistent ``stylometric footprint'': a small subset of features, primarily entropy and lexical diversity, consistently separates AI-generated text from human writing across 8 LLMs and 5 domains, while the remaining features depend heavily on the domain and generator. AI editing, however, does not reproduce the same footprint. Relative to their human-written sources, AI-edited texts show only a small increase in lexical diversity and a decrease in entropy, rather than the joint increase that characterizes AI generation. Lexical density, which contributes little to generation, instead becomes the dominant editing-associated signal. Stylometric features therefore separate AI-edited text from AI-generated text but are substantially less effective at separating it from human-written text. Our results suggest that ``AI text'' is not a single phenomenon: generation and editing leave qualitatively different stylometric traces and should be studied separately.

cs.CL