Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Weight-Space Geometry of Offline Reasoning Training

Summary

This paper investigates whether six offline RL losses (SFT, RFT, DFT, RIFT, Offline GRPO, DPO) are mechanistically distinct in weight-space geometry when used for reasoning distillation. Using identical math rollouts from Qwen3-4B, they find SFT, RFT, and RIFT have nearly colinear deltas; DFT diverges; Offline GRPO adds orthogonal components; and DPO lies in a near-orthogonal subspace with highest accuracy but a mode-connectivity barrier.

SourcearXiv Machine LearningAuthor: Aleksandr Nikolich, Igor Kiselev, Vladimir Platonov, Karina Romanova
Weight-Space Geometry of Offline Reasoning Training
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[2606.23740] Weight-Space Geometry of Offline Reasoning Training

[Submitted on 21 Jun 2026]

Title:Weight-Space Geometry of Offline Reasoning Training

View a PDF of the paper titled Weight-Space Geometry of Offline Reasoning Training, by Aleksandr Nikolich and 3 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Offline reinforcement-learning losses (RFT, RIFT, DFT, Offline GRPO, DPO) are widely used to distill reasoning from large teachers into smaller students, and are typically compared on downstream accuracy alone. We ask whether they are mechanistically distinct or converge to a similar weight update. Training six methods (SFT, RFT, DFT, RIFT, Offline GRPO, DPO) on identical math rollouts from a single base model (Qwen3-4B) with attention-only LoRA, we analyze the resulting deltas via cosine similarity, principal-angle subspace analysis, linear mode connectivity, and CKA. We observe: (i) SFT, RFT, and RIFT have nearly colinear weight deltas (cosine >= 0.97, top-1 principal angle ~7 deg median over 144 modules) and comparable GSM8K accuracy (87-88%, n=1319; pairwise McNemar p >= 0.15); (ii) DFT diverges further in direction than any reward-weighted method despite using the same data; (iii) Offline GRPO adds a substantial component orthogonal to the SFT direction (~67% globally, up to ~86% in late layers) while staying in the SFT loss basin; (iv) DPO sits in a near-orthogonal subspace, shows a mode-connectivity barrier, and collapses late-layer CKA to ~0.46. DPO also reaches the highest accuracy in our protocol on both GSM8K (93.5%, McNemar p

new | recent | 2026-06

Change to browse by:

cs cs.AI

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

IArxiv recommender toggle

IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • SFT, RFT, and RIFT have cosine similarity >= 0.97 and comparable GSM8K accuracy (~87-88%).
  • DFT's update direction diverges more than any reward-weighted method.
  • Offline GRPO adds ~67% orthogonal component to SFT direction (up to 86% in late layers) while staying in the SFT loss basin.
  • DPO lies in a near-orthogonal subspace, achieves 93.5% on GSM8K and 30% on AIME26, but shows a mode-connectivity barrier.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.