#01Nov 12, 2026
cs.LG
Two mathematical models of knowledge distillation
Audrey Xie, Ludwig Schmidt, John Duchi
Many hypotheses compete to explain the successes of knowledge distillation. To help address this, we propose and analyze a mathematical model of distillation, which suggests that distillation's performance comes not from obtaining better models but from easier to optimize landscapes. For generalized linear models trained with stochastic gradient descent, we prove that distillation fits performant student models asymptotically more quickly than non-distilled models. In rank-1 matrix approximation, we characterize conditions on the target matrix under which gradient descent with distillation converges strictly faster than training on the supervised objective. The theory helps delineate the ways distillation provides benefits (i.e., in optimization speed, not in generalization), and experiments on real datasets corroborate the theoretical predictions.
#02Nov 12, 2026
stat.ME
When Both Sides Adapt: The Challenges of Evaluating Interactive LLM Systems
Hannah Li
In interactive systems where users engage with LLMs, users are adaptive and, after observing LLM responses, can change their prompting strategy, as well as the type and difficulty of subsequent tasks. Thus model responses can influence the set of prompts on which the model is subsequently evaluated. We study the implications of this user adaptivity and prompt endogeneity for the evaluation of LLMs. We define two classes of estimands for comparing models: the common-distribution effect, which compares model performance on the same distribution of prompts, and the induced-distribution effect, which compares each model on the prompt distribution generated through user interaction. We show that offline benchmark evaluation and live A/B testing target different quantities, with the standard difference-in-means estimators for the two methods converging to the common-distribution effect and the induced-distribution effect, respectively. This distinction can affect decision-making: the two comparisons can rank models differently and lead to discrepancies in deployment recommendations. We characterize when such ranking reversals occur and provide a sufficient condition under which the rankings are guaranteed to agree. This result provides a practical heuristic for assessing whether offline evaluation is sufficient to reproduce the decision suggested by a live experiment. Third, we show, in a stylized linear model of interactions, that user adaptivity can increase variance in estimation. Finally, we discuss implications of user adaptivity for the interpretation of experiments and show that adaptivity creates a common mechanism leading to common evaluation challenges, such as reward hacking and novelty effects. Together, this work highlights the necessity of measuring both model performance as well as changes in the user behavior that the model induces.
#03Nov 12, 2026
cs.CY
Scalable Conversational Assessment: Chat-Based Exams with a Two-Agent LLM Pipeline
Geoffrey Challen, Craig Zilles
Oral exams are compelling because (1) students can be asked to provide their reasoning for an answer and (2) their interactive nature permits follow-up questions to resolve ambiguous answers. But oral exams scale poorly. In this paper, we present scalable conversational assessment, an LLM-based system that conducts interactive text-based conversations with students to assess their ability to make and support an argument. We use a two-agent architecture to separate concerns and reduce the likelihood that answers are leaked to the student: the interviewer interacts directly with the student, but only receives guidance about the next question to ask the student; the hidden evaluator knows the goals of the whole activity, tracks the student's progress using a rubric, and guides the interviewer on when to follow-up on the current question or proceed to the next question. The system was first tested using a collection of simulated students with LLM personas of a particular ability level or adversarial tactic (e.g., answer-extractors, prompt-injectors, confident fabricators). A novel element of this evaluation was that it required the use of a fictional assessment topic to prevent personas that shouldn't have information from using knowledge present in the LLM's pre-training. The system was also deployed in a small, elective AI literacy course in both formative and summative contexts. Through manual and post-facto AI review of the transcripts we identified opportunities to improve the follow-up question generation and ensure that grading only credited ideas that the student (and not the interviewer) contributed.
#04Nov 12, 2026
stat.ML
Quantifying structural stability of transparent models for general insurance pricing
Félix Côté, Marie-Pier Côté
The short duration of general insurance contracts leads to rapid distributional shifts in the data, warranting regular model updates. This process may yield a post-update model that differs considerably from the pre-update model in both predictions and structure. Structural stability is upstream of predictive stability, yet existing structural stability metrics are mostly restricted to simple decision trees. Thus, we first introduce the notion of functional transparency, characterising models with a prediction function that can be expressed as a sum of univariate functions for main effects and bivariate functions for pairwise interactions. Then, we propose the Mean Squared Shape function distance, a metric to quantify the structural stability of functionally transparent models, which are particularly relevant in actuarial science. Using three public auto insurance datasets, we present a benchmark study to demonstrate the usefulness of our metric in identifying a stable and accurate transparent model. Generalised linear models with centred numerical covariates are stable, and explainable boosting machines (EBMs) offer a compromise between stability and performance. We also find that stabilisation strategies, such as sequential modelling and fixed hyperparameters, can substantially improve stability for both EBM and XGBoost models, with negligible impact on performance.
#05Nov 12, 2026
cs.DS
Sketching Language Models for Context Attribution
Christopher Liaw, Aranyak Mehta, Grigoris Velegkas and 1 more
Context attribution asks how removing parts of a prompt changes a language model's output. We study leave-one-out (LOO) attribution for a prompt of $n$ tokens and a fixed measurement function. Computing all LOO values directly requires $n$ model evaluations. Under a stability assumption, our algorithm estimates all LOO values to error proportional to $\varepsilon$ with constant probability using $O(\sqrt{\log(1/\varepsilon)}/\varepsilon)$ evaluation calls. To complement our upper bound, we prove a matching $Ω(\sqrt{\log(1/\varepsilon)}/\varepsilon)$ lower bound on the number of evaluation calls in an oracle model. Empirically, we verify coefficient decay consistent with stability and evaluate the performance of our sketching algorithm on a small language-model retrieval task. Technically, our result is based on a sketching algorithm for arithmetic circuits whose Taylor coefficients satisfy the stability condition recently introduced by Gunn [Gun26]. A direct adaptation of their forward differentiation sketches would require $\widetilde{O}(\log(n)/\varepsilon^2)$ evaluation calls. Our key observation is that we can apply forward differentiation to the backpropagation circuit, with only constant overhead over a forward sketch of the same Taylor degree. This reduces the variance of the sketches and is key to our improved evaluation bound. Our lower bound builds on the techniques of Amsel, Chen, Duman Keles, Halikias, Musco, and Musco [ACDH+26, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications] for lower bounding the number of matrix-vector queries to estimate the diagonal elements of random matrices.