Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

S2D2: Fast Decoding for Diffusion LLMs via Training-Free Self-Speculation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-13 · grok-4.5

Pith's one-line read The same block-diffusion language model can draft tokens in parallel and verify them in autoregressive mode, yielding faster and often more accurate decoding with no extra training.

desk verdict Training-free self-speculation for block-diffusion LMs is a real, usable systems idea; the headline multipliers are config-selected but the multi-family evidence still holds up. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.25702 v2 pith:FWFQMF3E submitted 2026-03-26 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords blockdiffusionlanguagemodelsspeculativedecodingself-speculationtraining-freeaccelerationconfidencethresholdingrejectionsamplinghybrid
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Block-diffusion language models try to beat pure left-to-right generation by finishing whole blocks with parallel denoising, but in the few-step regime needed for real speedups, simple confidence thresholds are brittle: set them high and quality falls, set them low and you waste steps. This paper argues that you do not need a second model or more training to fix that. Because shrinking the block size to one turns the same network into an autoregressive model, that network can draft a block with diffusion and then act as its own local sequence-level critic via standard speculative rejection sampling. Lightweight routers decide when the extra verifier pass is worth the cost. Across three major model families, the resulting hybrid trajectory improves the accuracy–speed frontier over strong dynamic confidence baselines, with large speedups over pure autoregressive decoding and, in several settings, higher accuracy as well.

What carries the argument

S2D2 (training-free self-speculative decoding): diffusion drafts tokens and confidences; the same model under block-size-1 masking supplies verifier probabilities; tokens in the first contiguous masked span are accepted left-to-right with probability min(1, q_i/p_i), with residual resampling on the first rejection; routing policies (minimum-span, score-threshold, hysteresis, optional bandit) decide when to pay for the verifier pass.

What would settle it

On the same models and benchmarks, run always-on and routed S2D2 against carefully tuned dynamic confidence baselines at matched wall-clock budget: if average accuracy never rises (or falls) while speed stays flat or worse—especially at large block sizes—the claim that AR self-verification is a useful local critic collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

A pretrained block-diffusion language model already contains both a parallel drafter (standard block decoding) and an autoregressive verifier (block size one). Inserting speculative acceptance of the first contiguous masked span, gated by cheap routing policies, produces a training-free hybrid decoder that is often both faster and more accurate than tuned confidence-threshold diffusion decoding.

Load-bearing premise

The model’s block-size-one mode is a good enough local critic of its own diffusion drafts that rejection sampling plus residual correction improves committed tokens enough to repay the extra forward pass.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Existing block-diffusion checkpoints can be accelerated at inference without distillation, auxiliary verifiers, or architecture changes.
  • Large-block few-step regimes that were previously unstable under pure confidence thresholding become usable operating points.
  • Built-in token-editing self-correction (as in some diffusion LMs) can be stacked with S2D2 rather than replaced by it.
  • Verification cost can be amortized by simple length- or score-based routers, so the method need not verify every step.
  • Speculative acceptance supplies a local AR-vs-diffusion residual-energy check that steers drafts without global multi-sample reweighting.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If block-size-one scores are only weakly calibrated, soft tempering of the acceptance ratio or better draft-probability estimators may matter more than fancier routers.
  • The same self-verification idea may transfer to other hybrid AR–diffusion or any-order generators that expose a cheap causal mode of the same weights.
  • Routing policies that track acceptance reward online could eventually replace fixed thresholds for long generations where draft quality drifts.
  • When draft and verifier disagree systematically on certain token classes (code vs math), task-conditioned routing may be a natural next control knob.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes S2D2, a training-free self-speculative decoding method for block-diffusion language models. The core idea is that reducing block size to one turns the same pretrained model into an autoregressive verifier, so standard block-diffusion decoding can draft tokens in parallel and the B=1 mode can accept or residual-resample them via rejection sampling (Alg. 3; §4.1–4.2). Lightweight routing policies (minimum-span, score-threshold, hysteresis, UCB) decide when the extra verifier pass is worth its cost (§4.3). Empirically, across SDAR (1.7B/4B/8B), Fast-dLLM v2, and LLaDA2.1-Mini on GSM8K, MBPP, HumanEval, and IFEval, S2D2 improves the accuracy–speed frontier relative to static/dynamic confidence-threshold baselines (Tables 1–3; Fig. 3), with reported highlights of up to 4.7× over AR and up to 1.57× over a tuned dynamic baseline with +4.5 average accuracy points on SDAR. Analysis frames verification as local AR-guided residual-energy correction (Remark 1; §4.4, App. A.3).

Significance. If the empirical claims hold under fairer reporting, this is a practically useful contribution: a plug-and-play, training-free acceleration recipe for an emerging class of hybrid AR–diffusion LMs, without auxiliary models or distillation. The observation that the same block-diffusion checkpoint supplies both drafter and verifier is simple and transferable, and the multi-family evaluation (position-aligned and right-shifted architectures; SDAR, Fast-dLLM v2, LLaDA2.1) plus public code strengthen credibility. The complementarity result with LLaDA’s token-editing self-correction (Table 3) is also valuable. The residual-energy interpretation is secondary; the main value is an inference-time method that often improves both speed and accuracy over strong dynamic confidence baselines in the few-step regime.

major comments (4)
  1. Tables 1–3 report only two hand-picked operating points (config-A/B, or A/B/C) per model, while Appendix Tables 6–10 show large sensitivity of both accuracy and speedup to τ_span, score thresholds, estimator choice, and hysteresis settings. The Abstract and §5.1 headline claims (e.g., 4.7× vs AR and 1.57× vs dynamic with +4.5 points on SDAR-1.7B config-B) therefore rest on selected configurations rather than a fixed, pre-specified policy. Please either (i) designate one policy and hyperparameter rule a priori and report it across all models/tasks, or (ii) report full Pareto frontiers / multi-seed summaries so the claimed frontier improvement is not confounded by post-hoc config selection.
  2. The load-bearing assumption in §4.1–4.2 and Remark 1 is that the pretrained B=1 mode is a sufficiently calibrated local critic for min(1, q_i/p_i) acceptance and residual resampling (P_ℓver − P_ℓ)+ on diffusion drafts. App. A.3 correctly notes this is only an in-family AR conditional, not a matched residual energy model. The paper does not quantify calibration (e.g., acceptance-rate vs. actual quality of residual resamples, or q/p reliability by position/progress). Without this, it is hard to know when residual resampling systematically improves committed tokens versus paying for a miscalibrated extra pass. A short diagnostic—acceptance rates, residual-resample win rates, or quality of accepted vs. rejected prefixes—would substantially strengthen the central mechanism claim.
  3. Main results (Tables 1–3) report point estimates with no error bars, seeds, or variance over sampling/decoding stochasticity. Given that ablations already show nontrivial accuracy swings (e.g., Table 6, B=32: Avg from ~67.5 to ~76.5 depending on τ_span), statistical uncertainty is material to the “consistently improves” claim in the Abstract and §5.1. Please add multi-seed or bootstrap intervals on at least the primary SDAR and LLaDA settings, or otherwise justify that single-run differences of a few points are stable.
  4. For Fast-dLLM v2 (Table 2), speedups are relative to B=4, SB=1 rather than true B=1 AR, because B=1 is “unreliable.” That is understandable, but it weakens cross-family comparability of the “× over AR” narrative used in the Abstract. Please state this limitation more prominently in §5.1 and avoid aggregating Fast-dLLM multipliers with SDAR’s true-AR baselines without qualification.
minor comments (5)
  1. Figure 1 is dense; the routing-policy panel (d) and dual attention-mask layouts (c) would benefit from a short caption walkthrough of one full step (draft → route → verify/fallback).
  2. Notation for draft vs. verifier logits (ℓ vs. ℓ_ver) and residual (P_ℓver − P_ℓ)+ is clear in Alg. 3 but less so in the main text of §4.1; a one-line definition of residual resampling there would help.
  3. Table 3 is labeled “preliminary” for LLaDA2.1-Mini and covers only GSM8K/MBPP; either expand to HumanEval/IFEval for parity with Tables 1–2 or soften the Abstract’s LLaDA claim to match the limited scope.
  4. App. A.5 notes that better acceptance-length estimators (hard margin) do not yield better task accuracy than soft entropy; this is an interesting finding and deserves a sentence in the main §5.2 rather than only the appendix.
  5. Minor polish: “aspeed-firstquestion” spacing in §1; consistent use of “block-size-1” vs. “block size 1”; ensure all appendix table references in §5.2 match the final numbering.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: empirical methods paper whose claims rest on external benchmarks, not on self-definitional or fitted-as-prediction reductions.

full rationale

S2D2 is a training-free inference procedure: block-diffusion drafting plus optional block-size-1 verification with standard speculative acceptance min(1, qi/pi) and residual resampling, gated by lightweight routing. The central claims (Abstract; §5.1, Tables 1–3) are measured accuracy–speed tradeoffs against AR and confidence-threshold diffusion baselines on public tasks (GSM8K, MBPP, HumanEval, IFEval). Those numbers are not forced by normalization, by defining the metric in terms of the method, or by fitting a parameter then re-reporting a related quantity as a prediction. The B=1 AR mode is an architectural extreme of the same pretrained model (stated as an observation, not a uniqueness theorem). Remark 1 / Eq. (8) only rewrites the usual acceptance ratio as a local residual energy Ei = −log(qi/pi); the paper presents this as an interpretive link to EDLM-style residual energy (§4.4, A.3), not as a first-principles derivation that produces the empirical speedups. Self-citations (e.g., related Han/He/Zhang works) appear only as background and are not load-bearing for the frontier claim. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input-as-prediction, uniqueness import, or ansatz-via-self-citation chain is present. Honest non-finding: score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim is empirical: a training-free hybrid of block-diffusion drafting and B=1 AR verification improves measured accuracy–speed tradeoffs. It rests on standard speculative-decoding machinery, the architectural fact that BD3-style models admit a B=1 AR view, and many hand-chosen routing/threshold/block-size knobs. No new physical entities; free parameters are inference hyperparameters, not fitted scientific constants.

free parameters (4)
  • Routing thresholds (τ_span, τ_score, τ_on, τ_off) and cost c
    Decide when to pay for a verifier forward pass; swept and selected per model/config in §5.1 and App. A.7.
  • Block size B / sub-block size SB and denoising steps S
    Operating regime of both baseline and S2D2; headline speedups depend on large-B settings where plain diffusion is unstable.
  • Draft confidence threshold τ and acceptance-estimator knobs (β, τ_margin, γ tempering)
    Control fallback unmasking and estimated accepted prefix length ˆK; ablated in App. A.5 and A.8.
  • LLaDA edit/mask thresholds (τ_mask, τ_edit)
    Define quality vs conservative modes when comparing to built-in token editing (Table 3).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Reducing block size to 1 yields an autoregressive factorization usable as a verifier for the same pretrained weights.
    Key observation in Abstract/§4.1; true for the BD3-style families studied, not a universal property of all diffusion LMs.
  • standard math Speculative rejection sampling with acceptance min(1, q_i/p_i) and residual resampling is a valid local acceptance test (standard SD).
    Imported from Leviathan et al. / Chen et al.; used in Alg. 3. Full trajectory is hybrid, so global target-distribution preservation is not claimed (§4.4).
  • domain assumption Confidence-threshold block-diffusion decoding is a strong, fair baseline when tuned (static/dynamic schedules).
    Comparison design in §5; fairness depends on how thoroughly baselines are tuned relative to S2D2 configs.
  • domain assumption Wall-clock speedup ratios measured in the authors’ setup transfer as meaningful efficiency claims.
    Speed is implementation- and hardware-dependent; paper reports relative multipliers without full timing protocol in the main text.
invented entities (2)
  • S2D2 self-verification mode (2L attention mask / right-shifted causal verifier view)
    purpose: Compute AR verifier probabilities for a drafted contiguous span in one forward pass on existing dLLMs.
    Engineering construct in §4.2 (Eq. 3); independent_evidence false as a scientific entity, but falsifiable as code behavior.
  • Verification routing policies (min-span, score-threshold, hysteresis, UCB bandit)
    purpose: Invoke verification only when expected accepted prefix length amortizes the extra pass.
    Method components in §4.3 / Alg. 4; performance is the empirical test, not an external physical prediction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of S2D2: Fast Decoding for Diffusion LLMs via Training-Free Self-Speculation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FWFQMF3E

@misc{pith2026260325702,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: S2D2: Fast Decoding for Diffusion LLMs via Training-Free Self-Speculation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FWFQMF3E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.25702}
}
abstract

Block-diffusion language models offer a promising path toward faster-than-autoregressive generation by combining block-wise autoregressive decoding with within-block parallel denoising. However, in the few-step regime needed for practical acceleration, standard confidence-thresholded decoding is often brittle: aggressive thresholds hurt quality, while conservative thresholds require unnecessary denoising steps. Existing approaches that address this issue either require additional training or incur extra test-time compute. We present S2D2, a training-free self-speculative decoding framework for block-diffusion language models. Our key observation is that a block-diffusion model becomes autoregressive when the block size is reduced to one, allowing the same pretrained model to act as both drafter and verifier. S2D2 inserts a speculative verification step into standard block-diffusion decoding and uses lightweight routing policies to decide when verification is worth its cost. This yields a hybrid decoding trajectory in which diffusion proposes tokens in parallel, while the autoregressive mode acts as a local sequence-level critic. Across three mainstream block-diffusion families, S2D2 consistently improves the accuracy-speed tradeoff over strong confidence-thresholding baselines. On SDAR, we observe up to $4.7\times$ speedup over autoregressive decoding, and up to $1.57\times$ over a tuned dynamic decoding baseline while improving accuracy by up to $4.5$ points. On LLaDA2.1-Mini, S2D2 remains complementary to built-in self-correction, including a conservative setting where it is $4.4\times$ faster than the static baseline with slightly higher accuracy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.25702 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of S2D2. (a) Standard block-diffusion decoding accepts drafted tokens by confidence thresholding. (b) S2D2 inserts a self-speculative verification step: the same model under block-size-1 autoregressive masking verifies the first contiguous masked span, accepts tokens by rejection sampling, and falls back to standard diffusion decoding when verification is not invoked or terminates early. (c) Verification-mo… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. AR-ness (@k, k = 2) and decoding-confidence statistics on GSM8K and MBPP. Top row: local and global AR-ness for SDAR-8B-Chat and LLaDA 2.1. Bottom row: normalized decoded-token confidence under static and dynamic diffusion decoding; dashed curves in dynamic decoding indicate the number of decoded tokens per step. Reference accuracies (GSM8K, MBPP): SDAR-8B-Chat, AR (89.3%, 64.4%) and diffusion (89.6%, 61.0%); LLaDA … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Accuracy versus wall-clock time for SDAR-8B-Chat on GSM8K and MBPP. ITS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Drafting and caching with autoregressive attention masks. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: AR-ness and decoding confidence statistics for SDAR-8B-Chat. Top row: lo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: AR-ness and decoding confidence statistics for LLaDA-2.1-Mini. Top row: lo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. SLIM-RL: Risk-Budgeted Random-Masking RL for Diffusion LLMs Without Trajectory Slicing

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    SLIM-RL matches or exceeds TraceRL performance on MATH500, GSM8K, MBPP and HumanEval for diffusion LLMs by risk-budgeted random-masking RL without trajectory slicing.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 22 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Block diffusion: Interpolating between autoregressive and diffusion language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.09573,

    Marianne Arriola, Aaron Gokaslan, Justin T Chiu, Zhihan Yang, Zhixuan Qi, Jiaqi Han, Subham Sekhar Sahoo, and Volodymyr Kuleshov. Block diffusion: Interpolating between autoregressive and diffusion language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.09573,

  2. [2]

    Structured denoising diffusion models in discrete state-spaces.Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 34:17981–17993, 2021a

    Jacob Austin, Daniel D Johnson, Jonathan Ho, Daniel Tarlow, and Rianne Van Den Berg. Structured denoising diffusion models in discrete state-spaces.Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 34:17981–17993, 2021a. Jacob Austin, Augustus Odena, Maxwell Nye, Maarten Bosma, Henryk Michalewski, David Dohan, Ellen Jiang, Carrie Cai, Michael Terry, Qu...

  3. [3]

    Tiwei Bie, Maosong Cao, Xiang Cao, Bingsen Chen, Fuyuan Chen, Kun Chen, Lun Du, Daozhuo Feng, Haibo Feng, Mingliang Gong, et al. Llada2. 1: Speeding up text diffusion via token editing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.08676,

  4. [4]

    Language models are few-shot learners.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901,

    Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. Language models are few-shot learners.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901,

  5. [5]

    Accelerating large language model decoding with speculative sampling

    Charlie Chen, Sebastian Borgeaud, Geoffrey Irving, Jean-Baptiste Lespiau, Laurent Sifre, and John Jumper. Accelerating large language model decoding with speculative sampling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01318,

  6. [6]

    Evaluating large language models trained on code.arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374,

    Mark Chen. Evaluating large language models trained on code.arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374,

  7. [7]

    Sdar: A synergistic diffusion- autoregression paradigm for scalable sequence generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.06303,

    Shuang Cheng, Yihan Bian, Dawei Liu, Linfeng Zhang, Qian Yao, Zhongbo Tian, Wen- hai Wang, Qipeng Guo, Kai Chen, Biqing Qi, et al. Sdar: A synergistic diffusion- autoregression paradigm for scalable sequence generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.06303,

  8. [8]

    Diffusion posterior sampling for general noisy inverse problems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14687,

    Hyungjin Chung, Jeongsol Kim, Michael T Mccann, Marc L Klasky, and Jong Chul Ye. Diffusion posterior sampling for general noisy inverse problems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14687,

Show all 32 references
  1. [9]

    Training verifiers to solve math word problems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168,

    Karl Cobbe, Vineet Kosaraju, Mohammad Bavarian, Mark Chen, Heewoo Jun, Lukasz Kaiser, Matthias Plappert, Jerry Tworek, Jacob Hilton, Reiichiro Nakano, et al. Training verifiers to solve math word problems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168,

  2. [10]

    10 Preprint

    URL https://zenodo.org/ records/12608602. 10 Preprint. Yifeng Gao, Ziang Ji, Yuxuan Wang, Biqing Qi, Hanlin Xu, and Linfeng Zhang. Self speculative decoding for diffusion large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.04147,

  3. [11]

    Scaling diffusion language models via adapta- tion from autoregressive models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.17891,

    Shansan Gong, Shivam Agarwal, Yizhe Zhang, Jiacheng Ye, Lin Zheng, Mukai Li, Chenxin An, Peilin Zhao, Wei Bi, Jiawei Han, et al. Scaling diffusion language models via adapta- tion from autoregressive models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.17891,

  4. [12]

    Diffucoder: Understanding and improving masked diffusion models for code generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.20639,

    Shansan Gong, Ruixiang Zhang, Huangjie Zheng, Jiatao Gu, Navdeep Jaitly, Lingpeng Kong, and Yizhe Zhang. Diffucoder: Understanding and improving masked diffusion models for code generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.20639,

  5. [13]

    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,

  6. [14]

    Reviving any-subset autoregressive models with principled parallel sampling and speculative decoding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.20456,

    Gabe Guo and Stefano Ermon. Reviving any-subset autoregressive models with principled parallel sampling and speculative decoding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.20456,

  7. [15]

    Autoregressive diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.02037,

    Emiel Hoogeboom, Alexey A Gritsenko, Jasmijn Bastings, Ben Poole, Rianne van den Berg, and Tim Salimans. Autoregressive diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.02037,

  8. [16]

    Openai o1 system card

    Aaron Jaech, Adam Kalai, Adam Lerer, Adam Richardson, Ahmed El-Kishky, Aiden Low, Alec Helyar, Aleksander Madry, Alex Beutel, Alex Carney, et al. Openai o1 system card. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16720,

  9. [17]

    Mercury: Ultra-fast language models based on diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.17298,

    Inception Labs, Samar Khanna, Siddhant Kharbanda, Shufan Li, Harshit Varma, Eric Wang, Sawyer Birnbaum, Ziyang Luo, Yanis Miraoui, Akash Palrecha, et al. Mercury: Ultra-fast language models based on diffusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.17298,

  10. [18]

    Refusion: A diffusion large language model with parallel autoregressive decoding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.13586,

    Jia-Nan Li, Jian Guan, Wei Wu, and Chongxuan Li. Refusion: A diffusion large language model with parallel autoregressive decoding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.13586,

  11. [19]

    Discrete diffusion modeling by estimating the ratios of the data distribution.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.16834,

    Aaron Lou, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Discrete diffusion modeling by estimating the ratios of the data distribution.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.16834,

  12. [20]

    Large language diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.09992,

    Shen Nie, Fengqi Zhu, Zebin You, Xiaolu Zhang, Jingyang Ou, Jun Hu, Jun Zhou, Yankai Lin, Ji-Rong Wen, and Chongxuan Li. Large language diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.09992,

  13. [21]

    Yair Schiff, Subham Sekhar Sahoo, Hao Phung, Guanghan Wang, Sam Boshar, Hugo Dalla- torre, Bernardo P de Almeida, Alexander M Rush, Thomas PIERROT, and Volodymyr Kuleshov

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2506.01928. Yair Schiff, Subham Sekhar Sahoo, Hao Phung, Guanghan Wang, Sam Boshar, Hugo Dalla- torre, Bernardo P de Almeida, Alexander M Rush, Thomas PIERROT, and Volodymyr Kuleshov. Simple guidance mechanisms for discrete diffusion models. InThe Thir...

  14. [22]

    Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971,

    Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timoth´ee Lacroix, Baptiste Rozi `ere, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971,

  15. [23]

    Diffusion llms can do faster-than-ar inference via discrete diffusion forcing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.09192,

    Xu Wang, Chenkai Xu, Yijie Jin, Jiachun Jin, Hao Zhang, and Zhijie Deng. Diffusion llms can do faster-than-ar inference via discrete diffusion forcing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.09192,

  16. [24]

    Minkai Xu, Tomas Geffner, Karsten Kreis, Weili Nie, Yilun Xu, Jure Leskovec, Stefano Ermon, and Arash Vahdat

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22618. Minkai Xu, Tomas Geffner, Karsten Kreis, Weili Nie, Yilun Xu, Jure Leskovec, Stefano Ermon, and Arash Vahdat. Energy-based diffusion language models for text generation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21357,

  17. [25]

    Dream 7b: Diffusion large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.15487,

    Jiacheng Ye, Zhihui Xie, Lin Zheng, Jiahui Gao, Zirui Wu, Xin Jiang, Zhenguo Li, and Ling- peng Kong. Dream 7b: Diffusion large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.15487,

  18. [26]

    Redi: Rectified discrete flow.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.15897,

    Jaehoon Yoo, Wonjung Kim, and Seunghoon Hong. Redi: Rectified discrete flow.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.15897,

  19. [27]

    T3d: Few-step diffusion language models via trajectory self-distillation with direct discriminative optimization

    Tunyu Zhang, Xinxi Zhang, Ligong Han, Haizhou Shi, Xiaoxiao He, Zhuowei Li, Hao Wang, Kai Xu, Akash Srivastava, Vladimir Pavlovic, et al. T3d: Few-step diffusion language models via trajectory self-distillation with direct discriminative optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.12262,

  20. [28]

    Variational masked diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.23606,

    Yichi Zhang, Alex Schwing, and Zhizhen Zhao. Variational masked diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.23606,

  21. [29]

    Direct discriminative optimization: Your likelihood-based visual generative model is secretly a gan discriminator.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.01103,

    Kaiwen Zheng, Yongxin Chen, Huayu Chen, Guande He, Ming-Yu Liu, Jun Zhu, and Qin- sheng Zhang. Direct discriminative optimization: Your likelihood-based visual generative model is secretly a gan discriminator.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.01103,

  22. [30]

    Instruction-following evaluation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.07911,

    Jeffrey Zhou, Tianjian Lu, Swaroop Mishra, Siddhartha Brahma, Sujoy Basu, Yi Luan, Denny Zhou, and Le Hou. Instruction-following evaluation for large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.07911,

  23. [31]

    Instead, after a draft forward pass, it selects which positions to unmask using token confidence, either according to a fixed schedule or a dynamic threshold

    typically operates in a few-step regime and does not directly sample from this factorized posterior. Instead, after a draft forward pass, it selects which positions to unmask using token confidence, either according to a fixed schedule or a dynamic threshold. This can be viewe...

  24. [32]

    +logp θ(x0 |x t) + logq( ¯x0)−logZ , (11) where q(x0) denotes the autoregressive verification density and pθ(x0 |x t) is the diffusion proposal distribution (Xu et al., 2024). Ignoring the additive constant logq( ¯x0)−logZ , (where ¯x0 is the unmasked tokens inx t) this is exa...

Pith tools

Reviewed July 13, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.