arXiv ScienceSearch

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 papers

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

Meta-ethics and AI: exploring the novel meta-ethical questions in the era of AI

With the development of artificial intelligence (AI), the landscape of meta-ethics, which has largely centred on human ethics, faces pressures that may significantly reconfigure it. In particular, if future AI systems were to exhibit sufficiently integrated capacities for moral reasoning, moral intentionality, and moral reflection, novel meta-ethical questions would arise concerning what I call "AI's own ethics", as distinct from ethical principles merely imposed on AI by human designers. This paper offers a conditional and methodological framework for identifying the questions that would emerge if such AI systems were to arise. On that basis, the paper distinguishes four domains of meta-ethical inquiry in the era of AI: questions about the nature of human ethics from the human perspective; questions about the nature of AI's own ethics from the human perspective; questions about the nature of human ethics from the AI perspective; and questions about the nature of AI's own ethics from the AI perspective. The paper then considers how some existing mainstream meta-ethical theories (such as cognitivism and non-cognitivism, error theory and success theory, relativism, and objective realism) might illuminate these domains, while arguing that many familiar human-centred formulations of those theories may not transfer straightforwardly to AI cases without substantial revision. The overall conclusion is that the emergence of AI's own ethics would place significant pressure on current frameworks and may require substantial refinement, reconstruction, or reconceptualisation.

cs.AI

AI Morbidity and Mortality: A Framework for Clinical AI Failure Review

Clinical artificial intelligence is increasingly embedded in real-world care, yet existing safety mechanisms are poorly suited to reconstructing and learning from individual AI-related errors and near-misses. Aggregate model monitoring can identify performance changes, and traditional patient safety reporting can capture adverse events, but neither is designed to explain how risk emerges across the interaction among AI systems, clinicians, workflows, and institutional controls. We propose AI Morbidity and Mortality (AI M&M), a structured, blameless framework for case-based review of clinical AI failures. The framework combines standardized case intake, evidence preservation and investigator-level reconstruction, tool-in-loop attribution, and corrective-action tracking. Each event is classified across four linked dimensions: Trigger - Mechanism - Clinical Pathway - Corrective Action, separating the condition that exposed a vulnerability from the process that produced risk, its consequence for care, and the remediation assigned. We demonstrate the framework using five illustrative outpatient medication and clinical decision-support cases; two clinician reviewers independently applied all four classification axes and reached agreement across all 20 axis-level classifications. AI M&M is intended to complement, rather than replace, model monitoring, patient safety reporting, and regulatory oversight by converting individual AI-in-workflow failures into actionable institutional learning. Prospective evaluation across institutions, AI systems, and clinical settings is needed.

cs.AI