OmniOPSD: Rationale-Privileged On-Policy Self-Distillation for Affective Computing

Boxue Yang; Fei Ma; Jingyi Chen; Laizhong Cui; Qi Tian; Shuimu Chen; Xiaojiang Peng; Yuanshen Guan; Zebang Cheng; Zheng Lian

Dense token-level guidance for affective MLLMs comes from a local teacher that sees frontier rationales as privileged context, not from imitating those rationales.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-12 13:54 UTC pith:KG6I3YXW

load-bearing objection Clean recipe that keeps frontier rationales off the student trajectory; mean gains look real, but the 84.19 SOTA number is softer than the abstract sells. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2606.15920 v2 pith:KG6I3YXW submitted 2026-06-14 cs.CV

OmniOPSD: Rationale-Privileged On-Policy Self-Distillation for Affective Computing

Zebang Cheng , Shuimu Chen , Boxue Yang , Yuanshen Guan , Jingyi Chen , Zheng Lian , Xiaojiang Peng , Fei Ma

show 2 more authors

LaiZhong Cui Qi Tian

This is my paper

classification cs.CV

keywords affective computingmultimodal large language modelson-policy self-distillationprivileged evidencerationale-privileged teacheremotion recognitionMER-UniBenchtoken-level distillation

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Affective computing asks models to read emotions, intentions, and behaviors from video, audio, and language, but the usual supervision is sparse: a single label does not say which facial, acoustic, or temporal cue supports the answer. Human rationales are expensive, and simply copying rationales generated by large frontier models can teach a smaller model the teacher's verbal style without true multimodal grounding. OmniOPSD separates the two jobs. Frontier models supply evidence-aware rationales only as training-time privileged context for a local teacher. The student rolls out its own answer from the original multimodal prompt; the teacher, conditioned on that rationale, scores the same student tokens and supplies dense token-level self-distillation. At inference the student needs only the raw multimodal input—no labels, no rationales, no closed models. On MER-UniBench the method reaches an average of 84.19 in the full audio-video-text setting and leads the audio-text and video-text settings as well, with ablations showing that the privileged-context design, not generic post-training, drives the gains.

Core claim

The paper establishes that for multimodal affective reasoning, frontier-generated evidence-aware rationales are most useful as teacher-side privileged evidence rather than as sequences the student must imitate. Conditioning a local EMA teacher on those rationales while the student samples its own trajectories from the original multimodal prompt yields dense token-level supervision on the student's own distribution, improving post-training performance over supervised fine-tuning and outcome-reward RL without requiring labels or rationales at inference.

What carries the argument

Rationale-privileged on-policy self-distillation (OmniOPSD): student next-token distributions under the original multimodal prompt are aligned, via generalized Jensen–Shannon divergence on student-sampled tokens, to a stop-gradient local teacher whose context additionally includes a frontier-generated evidence-aware rationale; an optional raw reward term can be mixed in, and the teacher is typically an exponential moving average of the student.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that frontier-generated rationales are faithful enough multimodal evidence that giving them only to a local teacher improves token targets, rather than injecting stylish but invented justifications into the teacher distribution.

What would settle it

Replace the frontier rationales with random or deliberately unfaithful evidence descriptions while keeping the same on-policy self-distillation loop; if in-domain and MER-UniBench gains largely vanish relative to the true-rationale condition, the privileged-evidence premise is supported; if they remain, the gains are not driven by rationale quality.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

Clean recipe that keeps frontier rationales off the student trajectory; mean gains look real, but the 84.19 SOTA number is softer than the abstract sells.

read the letter

The useful move here is simple: GPT-4o rationales never become student targets. They only condition a local EMA teacher that re-scores the student’s own on-policy tokens with temperature-scaled JSD. That separates evidence acquisition from policy learning in a way standard CoT distillation and vanilla OPSD do not, and it is well motivated for affective work where label-conditioned self-rationalization invents cues.

What is actually new is not OPD or self-distillation—they cite those—but the privilege design plus the empirical isolation. Method is specified cleanly (prompts, EMA, JSD, optional raw-reward hybrid). Table 3 is the best evidence: the same CoT context helps OmniOPSD and does nothing useful for GRPO. Figure 1 shows denser guidance lifts answer/format reward without collapsing length. They also own the OV-MERD+ miss instead of burying it.

Soft spots, in proportion: the load-bearing SOTA claim is cross-paper. Table 1 pulls AffectGPT-R1 and friends from published tables rather than matched re-runs under the same backbone, frames, cold-start, and decode. A few points of protocol drift would shrink the 4.71 gap. Privileged-rationale quality is only weakly tested (small in-domain CoT ablation), not human-checked against multimodal evidence—the paper’s own warning about invented justifications applies to the teacher context too. No multi-seed bars; free knobs (μ, α, β, τ) are fixed without sweep. OOD is mixed, as expected.

None of that breaks the core argument. This is a solid empirical post-training paper for people doing sparse-reward multimodal affect or on-policy distillation without frontier logits. Math and citations look honest; circularity is low for this genre. I would send it to referees with a request for matched baselines, seed variance, and a rationale-quality check. Worth engaging if you care about the recipe; treat 84.19 as provisional until re-run.

Referee Report

3 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper proposes OmniOPSD, a rationale-privileged on-policy self-distillation method for multimodal affective computing. Frontier-generated evidence-aware rationales (GPT-4o from MMEVerse) are used only as training-time privileged context for a local EMA teacher; the student samples rollouts from the original multimodal prompt, and the teacher provides dense token-level generalized JSD supervision on those same tokens (Eqs. 3–11), with an optional raw-reward hybrid term (Eqs. 12–14). Inference needs no labels, rationales, or closed-source access. On MER-UniBench the method reports best mean scores of 84.19 (A+V+T), 80.81 (A+T), and 79.74 (V+T) versus published AffectGPT-R1 and other baselines; ablations on MELD/MIntRec/IEMOCAP and OOD sets compare against SFT and GRPO, and Table 3 isolates that CoT-style context helps OmniOPSD but not GRPO.

Significance. If the gains hold under matched protocols, the work is a useful contribution to post-training for affective MLLMs: it cleanly separates evidence acquisition from policy learning, avoids frontier logits and offline CoT imitation, and targets a setting where labels are reliable but sparse and human rationales are costly. The method is specified with enough detail (student/teacher prompts, EMA teacher, temperature-scaled JSD, optional reward) to be reimplemented, and the CoT ablation plus training-dynamics figure give some mechanistic support beyond a pure leaderboard claim. The practical inference-time property—no labels, rationales, or closed models—is valuable for safety-critical human–AI interaction.

major comments (3)

Table 1 SOTA claim: baselines are taken from published tables rather than re-run under matched backbone, frame sampling (1–16 frames), cold-start, decoding, and evaluation protocol. Cross-paper gaps of several points are common for AffectGPT-R1, Emotion-LLaMAv2, etc.; the reported +4.71 mean over AffectGPT-R1 (and best means in A-T/V-T) is therefore not a controlled comparison. Either re-evaluate the main competitors under the same Qwen2.5-Omni setup or qualify the claim as “best among reported numbers under this protocol.”
§§1–3 and Table 3: the load-bearing premise that GPT-4o rationales are faithful multimodal evidence (not stylish hallucinations that pollute the EMA teacher in Eqs. 4–11) is tested only indirectly by a small in-domain CoT ablation (macro-F1 on three datasets). The paper itself argues that knowing the label does not yield reliable evidence for small MLLMs; the same risk applies to unverified frontier rationales. A human or automatic check of rationale–evidence alignment, or a teacher-context quality sweep on the MER-UniBench mean, is needed to support the central mechanism.
Tables 1–3 and Figure 1: results appear to be single-run means with no multi-seed error bars or variance. For a 4–5 point SOTA gap and for the CoT ablation deltas (2–6% relative), seed sensitivity of on-policy sampling and EMA distillation is material; at least 3 seeds or bootstrap intervals on the main mean and the Table 3 contrast would make the claim durable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation: OmniOPSD is an empirical training recipe evaluated on held-out benchmarks; reported metrics are not forced by construction from the training inputs.

full rationale

This paper proposes a post-training procedure (student on-policy rollouts from label-free multimodal prompts; local EMA teacher re-scoring the same tokens under frontier-generated rationale context; token-level generalized JSD, optionally plus a raw reward term) and measures classification-style metrics on MER-UniBench and separate OOD sets. The SOTA mean 84.19 and the ablation gains are empirical outcomes of training and evaluation, not algebraic identities of the loss or fitted parameters renamed as predictions. Frontier rationales enter only as teacher-side privileged context (Eqs. 2, 4, 11); they are not student imitation targets and are not available at inference. Labels appear as sparse answer/format rewards when α>0, but evaluation remains on held-out task metrics, so success is not definitional. Self-citations to AffectGPT / MER-line work and author-adjacent benchmarks frame the problem and supply baselines; they do not supply a uniqueness theorem or force the reported numbers. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input-as-prediction, or ansatz-smuggled uniqueness chain is present. Circularity score is therefore 0; concerns about unreproduced cross-paper baselines or unverified rationale faithfulness are correctness/robustness issues, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 5 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central SOTA/method claim rests on standard ML training machinery plus a few domain assumptions about multimodal affect supervision and the usefulness of unverified frontier rationales as teacher-only context. Free parameters are ordinary training knobs; invented entities are the framework components themselves, not new physical objects. No formal derivation from first principles is claimed.

free parameters (4)

EMA teacher decay μ = 0.999
Teacher parameters updated as μ·old + (1−μ)·student after each step; set to 0.999 without sensitivity study in the main text.
Reward mixing weight α = 0.2
Balances L_distill and optional raw policy-gradient reward term; set to 0.2 when rewards enabled.
Generalized JSD mixture β and temperature τ = β=0.5, τ=1.0
Control the distillation geometry; fixed at β=0.5, τ=1.0 for reported runs.
Learning rate and training schedule = 1e-6, 1 epoch
One epoch at 1e-6 from cold-start checkpoint; completion length cap 512; frames 1–16. Chosen by authors, not derived.

axioms (5)

domain assumption Expert/consensus affect labels are reliable outcome supervision but too sparse for evidence-grounded multimodal reasoning.
Stated in Introduction and §2.2; motivates not using labels alone for SFT.
domain assumption Frontier MLLM rationales contain useful multimodal evidence even though they are unverified and should not be imitation targets.
Core premise of §§1 and 3; rationales from GPT-4o/MMEVerse are never validated against human evidence annotations.
ad hoc to paper Label-conditioned self-rationalization is unreliable for small MLLMs (knowing the answer ≠ knowing the evidence).
Claimed as a finding motivating rationale privilege over label privilege (§1, contribution 2); only partially supported by the CoT ablation design.
domain assumption On-policy student trajectories plus dense teacher token scores reduce offline imitation mismatch and sparse RL credit assignment.
Inherited from OPD/OPSD literature cited in §2.1 and used to justify the training loop in §3.3–3.5.
standard math Token-level generalized JSD between student and stop-gradient teacher distributions is a valid dense supervision signal.
Standard divergence-based distillation; equations (7)–(11).

invented entities (2)

OmniOPSD (rationale-privileged on-policy self-distillation loop) no independent evidence
purpose: Unify frontier evidence acquisition with local on-policy student learning via dual-context student/teacher scoring.
The named framework is the paper’s main construct; independent evidence is only the reported benchmark gains, not an external formal property.
Rationale-privileged teacher prompt cT_i no independent evidence
purpose: Inject frontier evidence into teacher next-token distributions without exposing it to student rollouts or imitation targets.
Defined in §3.1–3.2 as PromptT(m,x,r); usefulness is measured only by ablation performance inside this paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 20475 in / 3992 out tokens · 37706 ms · 2026-07-12T13:54:49.218970+00:00 · methodology

0 comments

read the original abstract

Reinforcement learning for multimodal large language models (MLLMs) is often hindered by severe reward sparsity in complex reasoning tasks. This challenge is particularly pronounced in human-centered scenarios involving states, emotions, intentions, and behaviors, where heterogeneous multimodal signals and subjective human factors make high-quality chain-of-thought (CoT) annotations expensive and difficult to obtain. Although many multimodal datasets provide expert-annotated ground-truth labels, directly using these labels for supervised fine-tuning may encourage shortcut learning in multimodal perception and provides limited transparency for safety-critical human--AI interaction. To address these limitations, we propose OmniOPSD, a Rationale-Privileged On-Policy Self-Distillation framework that uses frontier-generated rationales as teacher-side privileged evidence rather than student imitation targets. OmniOPSD uses frontier-generated evidence-aware rationales only as training-time privileged evidence context for a local teacher. The student samples its own rollout from the original multimodal input, while the rationale-privileged teacher scores the same tokens and provides dense token-level supervision. Thus, the student learns on its own trajectory distribution without directly imitating frontier-model completions, and inference requires no labels, rationales, CoT annotations, or closed-source model access. Experiments on MER-UniBench show that OmniOPSD achieves state-of-the-art performance with an average score of $84.19$, and ablations further support the value of rationale-privileged teacher guidance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.15920 by Boxue Yang, Fei Ma, Jingyi Chen, Laizhong Cui, Qi Tian, Shuimu Chen, Xiaojiang Peng, Yuanshen Guan, Zebang Cheng, Zheng Lian.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Training dynamics of GRPO and OmniOPSD on Qwen2.5-Omni-3B. The three panels track the answer-accuracy reward, the format reward, and the completion length over training. both MC-EIU variants and on MAFW Emotion-SL. For the 7B model, it is the strongest posttraining method on MC-EIU Intent-ZH and both MAFW settings. This pattern supports the on-policy component of OmniOPSD: training on the student’s own ro… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

RP-OPSD: Resolution-Privileged On-Policy Self-Distillation for Multimodal Large Language Models
cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

Using original-resolution images as privileged teacher context over half-resolution student rollouts improves Qwen3.5 MLLMs by ~5.5% relative average score and trains 1.78× faster than answer-hint OPSD.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 12 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948,

Daya Guo, Dejian Yang, Haowei Zhang, Junxiao Song, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Ruoyu Zhang, Shirong Ma, Xiao Bi, et al. Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[2]

Reinforcement learning via self-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.20802,

Jonas Hübotter, Frederike Lübeck, Lejs Behric, Anton Baumann, Marco Bagatella, Daniel Marta, Ido Hakimi, Idan Shenfeld, Thomas Kleine Buening, Carlos Guestrin, et al. Reinforcement learning via self-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.20802,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[3]

D-opsd: On-policy self-distillation for continuously tuning step-distilled diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.05204,

Dengyang Jiang, Xin Jin, Dongyang Liu, Zanyi Wang, Mingzhe Zheng, Ruoyi Du, Xiangpeng Yang, Qilong Wu, Zhen Li, Peng Gao, et al. D-opsd: On-policy self-distillation for continuously tuning step-distilled diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.05204,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[4]

Why does self-distillation (sometimes) degrade the reasoning capability of llms?arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24472,

Jeonghye Kim, Xufang Luo, Minbeom Kim, Sangmook Lee, Dohyung Kim, Jiwon Jeon, Dongsheng Li, and Yuqing Yang. Why does self-distillation (sometimes) degrade the reasoning capability of llms?arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24472,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[5]

Mer 2023: Multi-label learning, modality robustness, and semi-supervised learning

Zheng Lian, Haiyang Sun, Licai Sun, Kang Chen, Mingyu Xu, Kexin Wang, Ke Xu, Yu He, Ying Li, Jinming Zhao, et al. Mer 2023: Multi-label learning, modality robustness, and semi-supervised learning. InProceedings of the 31st ACM international conference on multimedia, pp. 9610–9614, 2023a. Zheng Lian, Haiyang Sun, Licai Sun, Hao Gu, Zhuofan Wen, Siyuan Zhan...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[6]

Emotion and intent joint understanding in multimodal conversation: A benchmarking dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02751,

Rui Liu, Haolin Zuo, Zheng Lian, Xiaofen Xing, Björn W Schuller, and Haizhou Li. Emotion and intent joint understanding in multimodal conversation: A benchmarking dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02751,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[7]

Make acoustic and visual cues matter: Ch-sims v2

Yihe Liu, Ziqi Yuan, Huisheng Mao, Zhiyun Liang, Wanqiuyue Yang, Yuanzhe Qiu, Tie Cheng, Xiaoteng Li, Hua Xu, and Kai Gao. Make acoustic and visual cues matter: Ch-sims v2. 0 dataset and av-mixup consistent module. InProceedings of the 2022 international conference on multimodal interaction, pp. 247–258, 2022a. Yuanyuan Liu, Wei Dai, Chuanxu Feng, Wenbin ...

2022
[8]

https://thinkingmachines.ai/blog/on-policy-distillation

doi: 10.64434/tml.20251026. https://thinkingmachines.ai/blog/on-policy-distillation. Yu Luo, Jianbo Ye, Reginald B Adams Jr, Jia Li, Michelle G Newman, and James Z Wang. Arbee: Towards automated recognition of bodily expression of emotion in the wild.International journal of computer vision, 128(1):1–25,

doi:10.64434/tml.20251026
[9]

Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reason- ing in open language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300,

Zhihong Shao, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Junxiao Song, Xiao Bi, Haowei Zhang, Mingchuan Zhang, YK Li, et al. Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reason- ing in open language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[10]

A survey of on-policy distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.00626,

Mingyang Song and Mao Zheng. A survey of on-policy distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.00626,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[11]

Affordance-r1: Reinforcement learning for generalizable affordance reasoning in multimodal large language models

Hanqing Wang, Shaoyang Wang, Yiming Zhong, Zemin Yang, Jiamin Wang, Zhiqing Cui, Jiahao Yuan, Yifan Han, Mingyu Liu, and Yuexin Ma. Affordance-r1: Reinforcement learning for generalizable affordance reasoning in multimodal large language models. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 40, pp. 9738–9746, 2026a. Lei Wang, Yi ...

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[12]

Ai for service: Proactive assistance with ai glasses.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.14359,

Zichen Wen, Yiyu Wang, Chenfei Liao, Boxue Yang, Junxian Li, Weifeng Liu, Haocong He, Bolong Feng, Xuyang Liu, Yuanhuiyi Lyu, et al. Ai for service: Proactive assistance with ai glasses.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.14359,

arXiv
[13]

Innovator-vl: A multimodal large language model for scientific discovery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.19325, 2026a

Zichen Wen, Boxue Yang, Shuang Chen, Yaojie Zhang, Yuhang Han, Junlong Ke, Cong Wang, Yicheng Fu, Jiawang Zhao, Jiangchao Yao, et al. Innovator-vl: A multimodal large language model for scientific discovery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.19325, 2026a. Zichen Wen, Boxue Yang, Junlong Ke, Jiajie Huang, Chenfei Liao, Junxi Wang, Xuyang Liu, and Linfeng Zhang. Evo...

arXiv
[14]

Mosi: multimodal cor- pus of sentiment intensity and subjectivity analysis in online opinion videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06259,

Amir Zadeh, Rowan Zellers, Eli Pincus, and Louis-Philippe Morency. Mosi: multimodal cor- pus of sentiment intensity and subjectivity analysis in online opinion videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06259,

Pith/arXiv arXiv
[15]

Jingyi Zhang, Jiaxing Huang, Huanjin Yao, Shunyu Liu, Xikun Zhang, Shijian Lu, and Dacheng Tao

URLhttps://openreview.net/forum?id=nY9nITZQjc. Jingyi Zhang, Jiaxing Huang, Huanjin Yao, Shunyu Liu, Xikun Zhang, Shijian Lu, and Dacheng Tao. R1-vl: Learning to reason with multimodal large language models via step-wise group relative pol- icy optimization.2025 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pp. 1859– 1869, 2025b. URLhttps:/...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[16]

Self-distilled reasoner: On-policy self-distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18734, 2026a

Siyan Zhao, Zhihui Xie, Mengchen Liu, Jing Huang, Guan Pang, Feiyu Chen, and Aditya Grover. Self-distilled reasoner: On-policy self-distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18734, 2026a. Ziqi Zhao, Xinyu Ma, Liu Yang, Yujie Feng, Daiting Shi, Jingzhou He, Xin Xin, Zhaochun Ren, and Xiao-Ming Wu. Rosd: Reflective on-policy self-dist...

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[1] [1]

Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948,

Daya Guo, Dejian Yang, Haowei Zhang, Junxiao Song, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Ruoyu Zhang, Shirong Ma, Xiao Bi, et al. Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in llms via reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[2] [2]

Reinforcement learning via self-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.20802,

Jonas Hübotter, Frederike Lübeck, Lejs Behric, Anton Baumann, Marco Bagatella, Daniel Marta, Ido Hakimi, Idan Shenfeld, Thomas Kleine Buening, Carlos Guestrin, et al. Reinforcement learning via self-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.20802,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[3] [3]

D-opsd: On-policy self-distillation for continuously tuning step-distilled diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.05204,

Dengyang Jiang, Xin Jin, Dongyang Liu, Zanyi Wang, Mingzhe Zheng, Ruoyi Du, Xiangpeng Yang, Qilong Wu, Zhen Li, Peng Gao, et al. D-opsd: On-policy self-distillation for continuously tuning step-distilled diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.05204,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[4] [4]

Why does self-distillation (sometimes) degrade the reasoning capability of llms?arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24472,

Jeonghye Kim, Xufang Luo, Minbeom Kim, Sangmook Lee, Dohyung Kim, Jiwon Jeon, Dongsheng Li, and Yuqing Yang. Why does self-distillation (sometimes) degrade the reasoning capability of llms?arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24472,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[5] [5]

Mer 2023: Multi-label learning, modality robustness, and semi-supervised learning

Zheng Lian, Haiyang Sun, Licai Sun, Kang Chen, Mingyu Xu, Kexin Wang, Ke Xu, Yu He, Ying Li, Jinming Zhao, et al. Mer 2023: Multi-label learning, modality robustness, and semi-supervised learning. InProceedings of the 31st ACM international conference on multimedia, pp. 9610–9614, 2023a. Zheng Lian, Haiyang Sun, Licai Sun, Hao Gu, Zhuofan Wen, Siyuan Zhan...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

[6] [6]

Emotion and intent joint understanding in multimodal conversation: A benchmarking dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02751,

Rui Liu, Haolin Zuo, Zheng Lian, Xiaofen Xing, Björn W Schuller, and Haizhou Li. Emotion and intent joint understanding in multimodal conversation: A benchmarking dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02751,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[7] [7]

Make acoustic and visual cues matter: Ch-sims v2

Yihe Liu, Ziqi Yuan, Huisheng Mao, Zhiyun Liang, Wanqiuyue Yang, Yuanzhe Qiu, Tie Cheng, Xiaoteng Li, Hua Xu, and Kai Gao. Make acoustic and visual cues matter: Ch-sims v2. 0 dataset and av-mixup consistent module. InProceedings of the 2022 international conference on multimodal interaction, pp. 247–258, 2022a. Yuanyuan Liu, Wei Dai, Chuanxu Feng, Wenbin ...

2022

[8] [8]

https://thinkingmachines.ai/blog/on-policy-distillation

doi: 10.64434/tml.20251026. https://thinkingmachines.ai/blog/on-policy-distillation. Yu Luo, Jianbo Ye, Reginald B Adams Jr, Jia Li, Michelle G Newman, and James Z Wang. Arbee: Towards automated recognition of bodily expression of emotion in the wild.International journal of computer vision, 128(1):1–25,

doi:10.64434/tml.20251026

[9] [9]

Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reason- ing in open language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300,

Zhihong Shao, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Junxiao Song, Xiao Bi, Haowei Zhang, Mingchuan Zhang, YK Li, et al. Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reason- ing in open language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[10] [10]

A survey of on-policy distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.00626,

Mingyang Song and Mao Zheng. A survey of on-policy distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.00626,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[11] [11]

Affordance-r1: Reinforcement learning for generalizable affordance reasoning in multimodal large language models

Hanqing Wang, Shaoyang Wang, Yiming Zhong, Zemin Yang, Jiamin Wang, Zhiqing Cui, Jiahao Yuan, Yifan Han, Mingyu Liu, and Yuexin Ma. Affordance-r1: Reinforcement learning for generalizable affordance reasoning in multimodal large language models. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 40, pp. 9738–9746, 2026a. Lei Wang, Yi ...

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[12] [12]

Ai for service: Proactive assistance with ai glasses.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.14359,

Zichen Wen, Yiyu Wang, Chenfei Liao, Boxue Yang, Junxian Li, Weifeng Liu, Haocong He, Bolong Feng, Xuyang Liu, Yuanhuiyi Lyu, et al. Ai for service: Proactive assistance with ai glasses.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.14359,

arXiv

[13] [13]

Innovator-vl: A multimodal large language model for scientific discovery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.19325, 2026a

Zichen Wen, Boxue Yang, Shuang Chen, Yaojie Zhang, Yuhang Han, Junlong Ke, Cong Wang, Yicheng Fu, Jiawang Zhao, Jiangchao Yao, et al. Innovator-vl: A multimodal large language model for scientific discovery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.19325, 2026a. Zichen Wen, Boxue Yang, Junlong Ke, Jiajie Huang, Chenfei Liao, Junxi Wang, Xuyang Liu, and Linfeng Zhang. Evo...

arXiv

[14] [14]

Mosi: multimodal cor- pus of sentiment intensity and subjectivity analysis in online opinion videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06259,

Amir Zadeh, Rowan Zellers, Eli Pincus, and Louis-Philippe Morency. Mosi: multimodal cor- pus of sentiment intensity and subjectivity analysis in online opinion videos.arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06259,

Pith/arXiv arXiv

[15] [15]

Jingyi Zhang, Jiaxing Huang, Huanjin Yao, Shunyu Liu, Xikun Zhang, Shijian Lu, and Dacheng Tao

URLhttps://openreview.net/forum?id=nY9nITZQjc. Jingyi Zhang, Jiaxing Huang, Huanjin Yao, Shunyu Liu, Xikun Zhang, Shijian Lu, and Dacheng Tao. R1-vl: Learning to reason with multimodal large language models via step-wise group relative pol- icy optimization.2025 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pp. 1859– 1869, 2025b. URLhttps:/...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[16] [16]

Self-distilled reasoner: On-policy self-distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18734, 2026a

Siyan Zhao, Zhihui Xie, Mengchen Liu, Jing Huang, Guan Pang, Feiyu Chen, and Aditya Grover. Self-distilled reasoner: On-policy self-distillation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18734, 2026a. Ziqi Zhao, Xinyu Ma, Liu Yang, Yujie Feng, Daiting Shi, Jingzhou He, Xin Xin, Zhaochun Ren, and Xiao-Ming Wu. Rosd: Reflective on-policy self-dist...

Pith/arXiv arXiv