arxiv-2608-18524 SRC-0097 · paper

DART-SD: Diamond-topology Aware Retrieval and Tuning for Self-Distillation of Multi-Turn Tool-Calling Agents

Created: 2026-08-19 · Ingested: 2026-09-15

Equipping Large Language Models (LLMs) with multi-turn tool-calling capabilities is essential for building autonomous agents. However, progress is fundamentally limited by the reliance on full-length trajectory imitation. For tasks involving multiple order-independent sub-goals, the optimal solution space forms a vast combinatorial diamond lattice. Forcing this rich topology into monolithic trajectories causes a severe topological collapse, indiscriminately penalizing valid alternative explorations and severely degrading policy diversity. To address this, we propose DART-SD (Diamond-topology A

In brief

Supervising only the tokens after a student agent's first unrecoverable mistake beats imitating whole teacher trajectories for multi-turn tool calling. The claim is that order-independent sub-goals make the solution space a graph, not a line, so global SFT loss punishes valid alternative exploration.

DART-SD builds an Interaction-State Transition Graph from teacher rollouts (Qwen3.6-27B and GLM-5.2), projects failed student rollouts onto the success-reachable region to find a Critical Topological Breakpoint, then fine-tunes with loss masked to the generated recovery steps only. Students are Qwen3-4B and Qwen3-8B, trained on 2,215 FTRL tasks over 5 iterations, evaluated on FTRL, BFCL, ToolHop, tau-bench, RoTBench.

On Qwen3-8B the average across 5 benchmarks goes 29.60 base, 41.64 SFT, 40.33 FTRL-GRPO, 45.58 DART-SD; on 4B, 25.19 to 39.17. Average tool calls in successful trajectories fall from 4.23 at Iter1 to 3.55 at Iter5, below the 4.02 golden references, while Solve-F1 rises 40.37 to 45.66. Mean CTB position advances 0.348 to 1.452.

Evidence includes a 4-step component ablation (SD 38.10, +CTB 39.51, +Progressive 43.93, +ISTG 45.66) and RL baselines, but no matched compute or token-budget accounting, 1 model family, 2 scales, self-run evaluation. Thinking mode is tested on only 3 benchmarks.

If you distil agents, consider masking loss to the post-error suffix rather than the full trace.

Written from the abstract by claude-opus-5 on 2026-09-15, with every figure checked against it. Not a substitute for the paper.

Referenced by

Claims in this catalog that draw on this source, and whether as support or counterpoint.

supportsWhen fine-tuning small open models (4B-8B Qwen3) for multi-turn tool calling, supervising only the recovery steps generated after the first point where the student's rollout leaves the teacher-supported state region — and zeroing the loss on the student's own valid prefix — beats full-trajectory imitation and outcome-reward RL on in-domain and held-out tool benchmarks, and the trained student's successful trajectories get shorter across iterations rather than longer.