Toward Student-oriented Teacher Network Training for Knowledge Distillation
Chengyu Dong, Liyuan Liu, Jingbo Shang
OpenReview ground truth
Abstract
How to conduct teacher training for knowledge distillation is still an open problem. It has been widely observed that a best-performing teacher does not necessarily yield the best-performing student, suggesting a fundamental discrepancy between the current teacher training practice and the ideal teacher training strategy. To fill this gap, we explore the feasibility of training a teacher that is oriented toward student performance with empirical risk minimization (ERM). Our analyses are inspired by the recent findings that the effectiveness of knowledge distillation hinges on the teacher’s capability to approximate the true label distribution of training inputs. We theoretically establish that ERM minimizer can approximate the true label distribution of training data as long as the feature extractor of the learner network is Lipschitz continuous and is robust to feature transformations. In light of our theory, we propose a teacher training method SoTeacher which incorporates Lipschitz regularization and consistency regularization into ERM. Experiments on benchmark datasets using various knowledge distillation algorithms and teacher-student pairs confirm that SoTeacher can improve student accuracy consistently.
Author context
Most prolific author: 5 submissions (credibility 1.00).
No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 32 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 48% of matchups.
- ▼ lost to Best Arm Identification for Stochastic Ris… ×6
- ▼ lost to Learning to Reject Meets Long-tail Learnin… ×4
- ▼ lost to Generalization error of spectral algorithm… ×4
- ▼ lost to SOTOPIA: Interactive Evaluation for Social… ×4
- ▼ lost to Mechanism of clean-priority learning in ea… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)