A Unified Revisit of Temperature in Classification-Based Knowledge Distillation

Logan Frank, Jim Davis
3/2/2026
cs.LGcs.CV

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

A central idea of knowledge distillation is to expose relational structure embedded in the teacher's weights for the student to learn, which is often facilitated using a temperature parameter. Despite its widespread use, there remains limited understanding on how to select an appropriate temperature value, or how this value depends on other training elements such as optimizer, teacher pretraining/finetuning, etc. In practice, temperature is commonly chosen via grid search or by adopting values from prior work, which can be time-consuming or may lead to suboptimal student performance when training setups differ. In this work, we posit that temperature is closely linked to these training components and present a unified study that systematically examines such interactions. From analyzing these cross-connections, we identify and present common situations that have a pronounced impact on temperature selection, providing valuable guidance for practitioners employing knowledge distillation in their work.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{frank2026unified,
  title  = {A Unified Revisit of Temperature in Classification-Based Knowledge Distillation},
  author = {Logan Frank and Jim Davis},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2603.02430},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.02430v2}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2603.02430.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2603.02430)

Discussion