Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Enforcing contiguous left-to-right acceptance within a dynamic window neutralizes the Joint Probability Dependence Error, letting diffusion LLMs decode at a 0.70 threshold with up to 53.19x (105.02x) speedups at comparable quality.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 13:37 UTC pith:44KXSIYG

load-bearing objection Solid empirical acceleration method with an overstated theoretical premise: DC-Leap's speedups are real and consistent, but the claim that it 'neutralizes the JPDE' doesn't survive a close read of the algorithm. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.20467 v1 pith:44KXSIYG submitted 2026-05-19 cs.AI cs.LG

DC-Leap: Training-Free Acceleration of dLLMs via Draft-Guided Contiguous Leaping Decoding

Yanhua Jiao , Tianyi Wu , Xiaoxi Sun , Yulin Li , HuiLing Zhen , Libo Qin , Baotian Hu , Zhuotao Tian
show 1 more author
Min Zhang
This is my paper
classification cs.AI cs.LG
keywords diffusion large language modelsparallel decodingjoint probability dependence errorcontiguous verificationdraft-guided decodinginference accelerationconfidence thresholdKV cache
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Diffusion large language models can decode many tokens in parallel, but parallel acceptance of independent tokens suffers from Joint Probability Dependence Error (JPDE), which prior methods control by keeping confidence thresholds above 0.9, wasting many correct low-confidence tokens. DC-Leap argues that enforcing a strict left-to-right contiguous prefix within a dynamically sized window—accepting tokens only when every earlier token in the window also passes—effectively neutralizes JPDE at the window level, so the threshold can safely drop to 0.70. It adds a draft mechanism that keeps high-confidence future tokens as uncommitted placeholders, preserving the bidirectional attention benefits of diffusion models during inference. The result is up to 53.19x throughput gain on MBPP for 1024-token generation and 105.02x when combined with KV cache, with generation quality roughly matching the baseline across three models and five benchmarks.

Core claim

The central claim is that the conservative confidence threshold (>0.9) required by parallel decoding is not inherent; it is an artifact of accepting tokens independently. By committing only the longest contiguous prefix whose token confidences exceed a threshold, within a window of maximum length L, DC-Leap replaces the global product-of-marginals approximation with a local, window-level factorization. This structural change, the paper argues, is what neutralizes JPDE, allowing τcommit=0.70 and τdraft=0.98 as fixed hyperparameters across all models and tasks. The draft-guided component supplies right-side context so the model is not forced into a purely left-to-right inference regime, aligni

What carries the argument

Dynamic Contiguous Verification (DCV): a dynamic decoding window W=[p,p+K) with K computed as the longest contiguous prefix where every token's confidence exceeds τcommit; only that prefix is committed. The formula K=Σ_{i=0}^{L-1} Π_{j=0}^{i} I(c_j>τcommit) implements this. Draft-guided Decoding: future positions with confidence above τdraft are cached as uncommitted placeholders, then re-masked when they enter the window; these drafts act as right-side anchors for bidirectional attention. Together they localize the conditional-independence assumption to a window and provide look-ahead context, which is what carries the argument.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that requiring accepted tokens to form a contiguous left-to-right prefix within a window is enough to control the Joint Probability Dependence Error, so that committing tokens at confidence 0.70 does not silently degrade generation quality.

What would settle it

Measure the actual joint probability dependence error under DCV: compute the KL divergence between the model's true conditional distribution over a window and the windowed product of marginals used at τcomm=0.70; if it stays comparable to the non-contiguous decoding error or grows with window size, the claimed neutralization is not happening. A simpler test: on a long open-ended coherence benchmark (e.g., 1024-token story generation), compare DC-Leap at 0.70 against full diffusion decoding; a quality drop beyond task noise would refute the 'comparable quality' claim.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Confidence threshold can safely drop from >0.9 to 0.70, recovering the large fraction (≈61% in the 0.65–0.9 band) of correct tokens discarded by conservative thresholds.
  • Long-sequence generation benefits most: 24.64x on GSM8K, 53.19x on MBPP at 1024 tokens; stacking with KV cache yields 105.02x MBPP.
  • The method is training-free and plug-and-play; no fine-tuning or policy network is needed, and it stacks with KV cache optimizations.
  • Fixed hyperparameters (τcommit=0.70, τdraft=0.98, L=128) work across three diffusion LLMs and five benchmarks with stable or slightly improved task scores.
  • Drafts provide look-ahead context, giving bidirectional attention something to attend to, which pure sequential decoding lacks.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The core mechanism suggests a general recipe: any masked-diffusion decoder could trade global independence for windowed prefix commitment; an adaptive threshold that scales with window position might squeeze further speed at the same quality, though the paper fixes 0.70.
  • The observed 'bursty' decoding (long jumps after an exploration phase) hints that drafts work as implicit planning anchors; a testable extension is using draft confidence to predict which regions will leap and allocating compute accordingly.
  • The claimed neutralization of JPDE is supported empirically, not by a formal bound; a quantitative bound linking window size L to the KL-divergence in Eq. (4) would let practitioners predict when the method will degrade (e.g., long-tail or highly interdependent text).

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes DC-Leap, a training-free decoding acceleration framework for diffusion LLMs. It introduces Dynamic Contiguous Verification (DCV), which decodes a window of masked positions in parallel but commits only the longest prefix whose token-level confidence exceeds a commit threshold (default 0.70, versus above 0.9 in prior work). A draft mechanism caches high-confidence future tokens as right-side context, preserving bidirectional attention benefits. Experiments on LLaDA-8B-Instruct, LLaDA-1.5, and Dream-v0-7B-Instruct across GSM8K, MATH, MBPP, HumanEval, and IFEval report average speedups of 4.7–8.3x and up to 53.19x on 1024-token generation, or 105.02x when combined with KV cache. The paper claims that DCV effectively neutralizes the Joint Probability Dependence Error (JPDE), thereby justifying the lower confidence threshold.

Significance. If the empirical results hold, DC-Leap is a practical, training-free acceleration method with substantial speedups and broadly preserved generation quality across several models and benchmarks. The paper's strengths include extensive benchmarking (3 models, 5 tasks), ablations of all key hyperparameters, a released code repository, and the demonstration of orthogonality with KV-cache optimization. The central risk is the theoretical framing: the claim that contiguous verification 'neutralizes JPDE' is asserted rather than derived. However, the empirical contribution can stand on its own if the authors either support the JPDE claim with a formal bound or explicitly reposition DC-Leap as an empirical heuristic validated by the experiments.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (5)-(6), Algorithm 1] The central claim that DCV 'effectively neutralizes the JPDE' and 'replaces the global conditional independence assumption with a local, window-level factorization' is not supported by the algorithm as written. In a single forward pass, all L window positions are predicted from the same masked input; later window tokens are not conditioned on earlier accepted tokens within that block. The chain-rule factorization in Eq. (5) applies to sequential commitment across iterations, not to a parallel block. Eq. (6) only truncates the jointly predicted prefix by a threshold. Consequently, JPDE within the window is not eliminated; contiguity only prevents out-of-order commitments. Please either (a) provide a formal bound relating the truncated contiguous acceptance rule to the KL divergence in Eq. (4), or (b) reframe the method as an empirical heuristic whose safety is validated by the experiments
  2. [Table 1, Fig. 2, App. E] The evidence offered for JPDE neutralization is a one-benchmark pilot (Table 1) and a confidence-gap plot (Fig. 2b); neither measures the joint error in Eq. (4) nor isolates the effect of contiguity from the threshold choice. Moreover, App. E, Table 7 shows that enforcing contiguity on drafts leads to an 'unsolvable dilemma' and cannot lower τ_draft without accuracy collapse or stagnation. This undercuts the general principle that contiguity licenses lower thresholds. To support the load-bearing premise, please measure JPDE or a direct proxy (e.g., block-level joint perplexity) under DCV versus non-contiguous acceptance, and reconcile the App. E negative result with the main claim.
  3. [Table 5 and Abstract] The headline 105.02x speedup is accompanied by quality drops of 82.79→79.30 on GSM8K and 38.40→36.40 on MBPP relative to the LLaDA-1.5 baseline with cache. The abstract's 'comparable generation quality' should be qualified; a 3–4 point drop on a 5-shot accuracy/pass@1 metric is not uniformly comparable. Please report the quality–throughput tradeoff explicitly, and consider providing multiple seeds or confidence intervals to establish whether the drop is significant.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Algorithm 1, line 9] Typo: 'Caculate' should be 'Calculate'. Also, Eq. (6) uses strict '>' while the text says 'falls below τcommit'; please unify the inequality notation.
  2. [Figures 1, 4, 6] Fig. 6 caption: 'maximun' → 'maximum'; Fig. 4: 'Inedx' → 'Index'; Fig. 1: the TPS values appear to be missing in the rendered graphic.
  3. [Sec. F.1] The text says 'vary τd from 0.65 to 0.8', but Table 9 reports τd in the range 0.85 to 0.98. Please correct the inconsistency.
  4. [Throughout] The terms 'KV-Cache', 'KV cache', and 'dLLM-Cache' are used interchangeably; please standardize to a single notation.
  5. [Abstract and Table 5] The abstract reports 'up to 53.19x' and 'up to 105.02x'; in the body these are exact numbers from Table 5. Add 'up to' consistently in Table 5 or use the same qualifier in the abstract.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No load-bearing circularity: thresholds are ablation-selected hyperparameters, speedups are direct measurements, and the JPDE-neutralization claim is an asserted mechanism rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

DC-Leap's central results (up to 53.19x on MBPP, 105.02x with KV cache) are directly measured throughput ratios of the implemented decoder, not constants derived from fitted thresholds. The commitment threshold tau_commit=0.70 and draft threshold tau_draft=0.98 are selected from sensitivity sweeps (Sec. 4.3, Tables 8-10) on the same benchmarks; this is standard hyperparameter selection, and the paper does not present these values as predictions or as outputs of Eqs. (4)-(6). Eq. (6) defines K as the longest prefix whose marginal confidences exceed tau_commit; this is an algorithmic definition, not a disguised prediction. The JPDE-neutralization claim (Sec. 3.2) is asserted qualitatively ('By preventing out-of-order commitments, the mechanism allows DCV to safely adopt a more lenient confidence threshold') and is supported only by the pilot accuracy comparison in Table 1 and the confidence-gap plot in Figure 2; no equation derives a bound on the KL divergence in Eq. (4) from the windowed prefix-commitment rule. Appendix E even shows that a contiguous-draft variant fails, which weakens the general 'contiguity licenses low thresholds' premise. These are correctness/evidence concerns, not circular reductions: no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no self-citation carries the load (the JPDE bound is cited to external EB-Sampler work, Ben-Hamu et al. 2026). Therefore no enumerated circularity pattern is exhibited; the score of 1 reflects minor robustness concerns rather than circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method rests on two domain assumptions about confidence calibration and the informativeness of unverified drafts, plus an ad hoc assumption that contiguous verification controls JPDE. The three hyperparameters are tuned on the evaluation benchmarks themselves, which is a source of potential overfitting.

free parameters (3)
  • commitment threshold τc = 0.70
    Chosen via sensitivity analysis on GSM8K and MBPP (Sec. 4.3, Table 8); directly controls token acceptance and speedup.
  • draft threshold τd = 0.98
    Chosen via sensitivity analysis on GSM8K and MBPP (Sec. 4.3, Table 9); controls which future tokens become drafts.
  • maximum window size L = 128
    Selected via ablation on GSM8K (Sec. 4.3, Figure 6); larger L increases parallelism, with slight accuracy cost.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Top-1 softmax confidence is a reliable proxy for token correctness in masked diffusion models.
    Used throughout for acceptance decisions and draft selection (Eq. 3, Eq. 6, Eq. 7); only empirically motivated by Figure 2a.
  • ad hoc to paper Enforcing left-to-right contiguous acceptance within a window reduces the joint probability dependence error.
    Central premise of DCV (Sec. 3.2); supported only by the small pilot in Table 1 and no formal analysis.
  • domain assumption High-confidence future tokens from the same model serve as reliable anchors for bidirectional attention.
    Foundation of the draft mechanism (Sec. 3.3); assumed beneficial based on Figure 2b, not proven.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 34822 in / 8193 out tokens · 80426 ms · 2026-08-02T13:37:25.287214+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

While parallel decoding is central to the efficiency of Diffusion Large Language Models (dLLMs), current strategies are often hindered by overly conservative confidence thresholds. These thresholds, necessitated by the Joint Probability Dependence Error (JPDE), result in redundant denoising iterations and suboptimal inference speeds. To overcome this, we propose DC-Leap, a training-free framework that enables reliable acceleration of dLLMs in the moderate-confidence regime. DC-Leap introduces a Dynamic Contiguous Verification strategy that integrates strictly-ordered causal constraints into the parallel decoding process. By progressively validating token dependencies, this mechanism effectively neutralizes the JPDE, enabling reliable acceleration with comparable performance. Furthermore, DC-Leap incorporates the draft-guided decoding mechanism, where the draft helps extend the context by leaping forward across multiple tokens, providing look-ahead context and retaining the structural benefits of bidirectional attention during inference. Extensive experiments on standard benchmarks demonstrate that DC-Leap achieves substantial speedups, up to 53.19x on MBPP for long-sequence generation, and up to 105.02x when combined with KV-Cache with comparable generation quality. Code is available at https://github.com/ffh-wyls/DC-Leap .

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.20467 by Baotian Hu, Huiling Zhen, Libo Qin, Min Zhang, Tianyi Wu, Xiaoxi Sun, Yanhua Jiao, Yulin Li, Zhuotao Tian.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview and Performance of DC-Leap. Top: Schematic of the proposed training-free framework, featuring Dy￾namic Contiguous Verification to neutralize JPDE through causal constraints, and a Draft Mechanism to expedite convergence via distal context. Bottom: Evaluation on MBPP for long-sequence generation. DC-Leap achieves up to 53.19× significant speedup while maintaining near-lossless performance. 1. Intro… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Motivation of DC-Leap. (a) Strict confidence thresholds in existing parallel decoding methods lead to the waste of potentially correct tokens. (b) Leveraging right-side context reduces the confidence gap, facilitating faster convergence. such as Fast-dLLM (Wu et al., 2026) and LocalLeap (Kong et al., 2025). These methods accelerate decoding by accept￾ing multiple tokens per step based on the confidence thr… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Dynamic Contiguous Verification (DCV) and Draft Mechanisms. Left: DCV determines window length K (tokens exceeding τcommit) and advances by committing K contiguous tokens. Right: Draft mechanism remasks invalid tokens within the window and selects future tokens on the right side of the current window exceeding τdraft as placeholders for subsequent decoding. confidence gap compared to decoding without right… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Illustration of the draft-guided decoding process. The proposed pipeline reconciles window-level sequentiality with global contextual awareness. By combining dynamic contiguous verification with an in-place draft update mechanism, DC-Leap utilizes future context on the right side to guide current denoising, effectively alleviating context limitations induced by strictly sequential decoding. optimal inferen… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Sensitivity analysis on the maximun window lehgth L for LLaDA-1.5 on GSM8K benchmark. Throughput (TPS, blue solid) and accuracy (red dash-dotted) are plotted against L, with horizontal dashed lines marking their respective baselines. × (809.71 TPS) on MBPP while maintaining competitive generation quality. This establishes DC-Leap as a robust, plug-and-play module for dLLMs acceleration. 4.3. Ablations and … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Cumulative decoded tokens with inference steps advancing. DC-Leap (blue) shows a bursty decoding pattern, enabling massive jumps in generation progress (e.g., around step 35) compared to the linear standard baseline (red). This sample achieves a total speedup of 5.22× on a 256-token task. D. Analysis of Decoding Dynamics To further understand the acceleration mechanism of DC-Leap, we analyze the cumulative… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 19 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Program synthesis with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07732,

    Austin, J., Odena, A., Nye, M., Bosma, M., Michalewski, H., Dohan, D., Jiang, E., Cai, C., Terry, M., Le, Q., et al. Program synthesis with large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07732,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  2. [5]

    H., and Chen, Y

    Chen, X., Huang, S., Guo, C., Wei, C., He, Y ., Zhang, J., Li, H. H., and Chen, Y . DPad: Efficient diffusion language models with suffix dropout. InThe Fourteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2026a. Chen, Z., Wang, W., Cao, Y ., Liu, Y ., Gao, Z., Cui, E., Zhu, J., Ye, S., Tian, H., Liu, Z., Gu, L., Wang, X., Li, Q., Ren, Y ., an...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [7]

    The llama 3 herd of models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21783,

    Dubey, A., Jauhri, A., Pandey, A., Kadian, A., Al-Dahle, A., Letman, A., Mathur, A., Schelten, A., Yang, A., Fan, A., et al. The llama 3 herd of models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21783,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  4. [8]

    Gptq: Accurate post-training quantization for generative pre- trained transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.17323,

    Frantar, E., Ashkboos, S., Hoefler, T., and Alistarh, D. Gptq: Accurate post-training quantization for generative pre- trained transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.17323,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  5. [9]

    Empirical analysis of decoding biases in masked diffusion models.arXiv:2508.13021,

    Huang, P., Liu, T., Liu, Z., Yan, Y ., Wang, S., Xiao, T., Chen, Z., and Sun, M. Empirical analysis of decoding biases in masked diffusion models.arXiv:2508.13021,

    arXiv

  6. [11]

    Accelerating diffusion llm inference via local deter- minism propagation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.07081,

    Kong, F., Zhang, J., Liu, Y ., Wu, Z., Tian, Y ., Zhou, G., et al. Accelerating diffusion llm inference via local deter- minism propagation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.07081,

    arXiv

  7. [12]

    Lisa: Reasoning segmentation via large language model

    Lai, X., Tian, Z., Chen, Y ., Li, Y ., Yuan, Y ., Liu, S., and Jia, J. Lisa: Reasoning segmentation via large language model. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024a. Lai, X., Tian, Z., Chen, Y ., Yang, S., Peng, X., and Jia, J. Step-dpo: Step-wise preference optimiza- tion for long-chain reasoning of llm...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [13]

    Confidence matters: Revisiting intrinsic self- correction capabilities of large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.12563, 2024a

    Li, L., Chen, Z., Chen, G., Zhang, Y ., Su, Y ., Xing, E., and Zhang, K. Confidence matters: Revisiting intrinsic self- correction capabilities of large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.12563, 2024a. Li, P., Zhou, Y ., Muhtar, D., Yin, L., Yan, S., Shen, L., Liang, Y ., V osoughi, S., and Liu, S. Diffusion language model knows the answer before i...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [15]

    Not all patches are what you need: Expediting vision transformers via token reorganizations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.07800,

    Liang, Y ., Ge, C., Tong, Z., Song, Y ., Wang, J., and Xie, P. Not all patches are what you need: Expediting vision transformers via token reorganizations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.07800,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  10. [16]

    Liu, Z., Yang, Y ., Zhang, Y ., Chen, J., Zou, C., Wei, Q., Wang, S., and Zhang, L

    URL https://llava-vl.github.io/blog/ 2024-01-30-llava-next/. Liu, Z., Yang, Y ., Zhang, Y ., Chen, J., Zou, C., Wei, Q., Wang, S., and Zhang, L. dllm-cache: Accelerating diffu- sion large language models with adaptive caching.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06295,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  11. [17]

    Large language diffusion models

    Nie, S., Zhu, F., You, Z., Zhang, X., Ou, J., Hu, J., ZHOU, J., Lin, Y ., Wen, J.-R., and Li, C. Large language diffusion models. InICLR 2025 Workshop on Deep Generative Model in Machine Learning: Theory, Principle and Effi- cacy,

    2025

  12. [18]

    Scalable lan- guage model with generalized continual learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.07470, 2024a

    Peng, B., Tian, Z., Liu, S., Yang, M., and Jia, J. Scalable lan- guage model with generalized continual learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.07470, 2024a. Peng, B., Wu, X., Jiang, L., Chen, Y ., Zhao, H., Tian, Z., and Jia, J. Oa-cnns: Omni-adaptive sparse cnns for 3d semantic segmentation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  13. [19]

    Declip: Decoupled learning for open-vocabulary dense perception

    Wang, J., Chen, B., Li, Y ., Kang, B., Chen, Y ., and Tian, Z. Declip: Decoupled learning for open-vocabulary dense perception. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, 2025a. Wang, J., Chen, K., Li, Y ., Chen, B., Zhao, H., Qi, X., and Tian, Z. Generalized decoupled learning for enhanc- ing open-vocabulary dense perception...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  14. [20]

    Qwen3 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09388, 2025a

    Yang, A., Li, A., Yang, B., Zhang, B., Hui, B., Zheng, B., Yu, B., Gao, C., Huang, C., Lv, C., et al. Qwen3 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09388, 2025a. Yang, S., Qu, T., Lai, X., Tian, Z., Peng, B., Liu, S., and Jia, J. Lisa++: An improved baseline for reasoning seg- mentation with large language model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.17240,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  15. [21]

    Visionzip: Longer is better but not necessary in vision language models

    Yang, S., Chen, Y ., Tian, Z., Wang, C., Li, J., Yu, B., and Jia, J. Visionzip: Longer is better but not necessary in vision language models. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, 2025b. 11 Training-Free Acceleration of dLLMs via Draft-Guided Contiguous Leaping Decoding Ye, J., Xie, Z., Zheng, L., Gao, J., Wu, Z., Jiang,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [22]

    Llada 1.5: Variance- reduced preference optimization for large language diffu- sion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.19223,

    Zhu, F., Wang, R., Nie, S., Zhang, X., Wu, C., Hu, J., Zhou, J., Chen, J., Lin, Y ., Wen, J.-R., et al. Llada 1.5: Variance- reduced preference optimization for large language diffu- sion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.19223,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [23]

    Related Work B.1

    Algorithm 1DC-Leap: Draft-Guided Contiguous Parallel Decoding Require:Modelp θ, promptx prompt, generation lengthL g, max window sizeL,confidence thresholdsτ commit, τdraft 1:Initialize sequencex←concat(x prompt,{[MASK]} Lg ) 2:p←len(x prompt)▷Pointer to the first unverified position 3:whilep < Lg do 4:// Draft Invalidation 5:x p:p+L ← {[MASK]}L 6:// Forw...

    2024

  18. [24]

    and InternVL 2.5 (Chen et al., 2025), inference acceleration is further complicated by the massive number of visual tokens processed through cross-modal attention. Current research addresses this by identifying and removing redundant visual information via token pruning or merging strategies (Bolya et al., 2023; Liang et al., 2022; Yang et al., 2025b). Dy...

    2025

  19. [25]

    While these methods effectively mitigate the overhead of AR architectures, they remain bound by the causal requirement of sequential drafting

    and object hallucination mitigation (Peng et al., 2025b). While these methods effectively mitigate the overhead of AR architectures, they remain bound by the causal requirement of sequential drafting. In contrast, dLLMs provide a framework for fully parallel decoding, which can theoretically achieve superior speedups. 14 Training-Free Acceleration of dLLM...

    2020

  20. [26]

    Efficient representations in these spaces are also key to downstream generation tasks, such as multi-angle 3D asset editing (Huang et al., 2025)

    and joint 2D-3D self-supervised representation frameworks (Wang et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2025). Efficient representations in these spaces are also key to downstream generation tasks, such as multi-angle 3D asset editing (Huang et al., 2025). B.2. Diffusion Large Language Models The paradigm of generative diffusion models, originally dominant in continu...

    2024

  21. [27]

    improved upon this by performing diffusion on the probability simplex. However, the field has largely converged towards Masked Diffusion Models (MDMs), which operate directly in the discrete state space by treating the forward process as a random masking operation. Recent scaling efforts have demonstrated that dLLMs can rival the performance of autoregres...

    2025

  22. [28]

    However, a critical limitation in these parallel approaches is the independence assumption

    proposes a post-training framework that employs a lightweight MLP filter to adaptively predict token stability and optimize remasking decisions. However, a critical limitation in these parallel approaches is the independence assumption. As noted by the EB-Sampler (Ben- Hamu et al., 2026), independently unmasking multiple tokens introduces a joint probabil...

    2026

  23. [29]

    Table 7.Performance of Contiguous Draft Strategy on GSM8K.We fix the commitment threshold τcommit = 0.7and vary the draft thresholdτ draft. τdraft Throughput (TPS) Speedup Accuracy (%) 1.00 51.73 4.89×79.53 0.95 52.10 4.92×79.53 0.80 51.72 4.89×79.53 0.70 51.89 4.90×79.53 0.65 50.96 4.82×79.53 0.60 51.97 4.91×79.53 0.50 51.92 4.91×79.61 0.40 51.17 4.84×78...

    2025

  24. [30]

    However, DC-Leap demonstrates its robustness in this constrained scenario, successfully delivering additional throughput gains with comparable accuracy

    It is worth noting that since dParallel already minimizes sampling steps to a highly compressed range for most inputs, further step reduction typically leads to performance degradation. However, DC-Leap demonstrates its robustness in this constrained scenario, successfully delivering additional throughput gains with comparable accuracy. F.3. Analysis of A...

    2026

  25. [2021]

    Bai, S., Cai, Y ., Chen, R., Chen, K., Chen, X., Cheng, Z., Deng, L., Ding, W., Gao, C., Ge, C., Ge, W., Guo, Z., Huang, Q., Huang, J., and Fei Huang, e. a. Qwen3-vl technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.21631,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [2022]

    Eagle: Specula- tive sampling requires rethinking feature uncertainty

    Li, Y ., Wei, F., Zhang, C., and Zhang, H. Eagle: Specula- tive sampling requires rethinking feature uncertainty. In International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024b. Li, Y ., Liu, Z., Li, Z., Zhang, X., Xu, Z., Chen, X., Shi, H., Jiang, S., Wang, X., Wang, J., et al. Perception, reason, think, and plan: A survey on large multimodal reasoning models.ar...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  27. [2023]

    P., Kaplan, J., Edwards, H., Burda, Y ., Joseph, N., and Greg Brockman, e

    Chen, M., Tworek, J., Jun, H., Yuan, Q., de Oliveira Pinto, H. P., Kaplan, J., Edwards, H., Burda, Y ., Joseph, N., and Greg Brockman, e. a. Evaluating large language models trained on code.arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  28. [2024]

    Accelerating large language model decoding with speculative sampling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01318,

    Chen, C., Borgeaud, S., Irving, G., Lespiau, J.-B., Sifre, L., and Jumper, J. Accelerating large language model decoding with speculative sampling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01318,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [2025]

    dparallel: Learnable parallel decoding for dllms

    Chen, Z., Fang, G., Ma, X., Yu, R., and Wang, X. dparallel: Learnable parallel decoding for dllms. InThe Fourteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2026b. Cobbe, K., Kosaraju, V ., Bavarian, M., Chen, M., Jun, H., Kaiser, L., Plappert, M., Tworek, J., Hilton, J., Nakano, R., et al. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXi...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [2026]

    Q., Sablayrolles, A., Mensch, A., Bamford, C., Chaplot, D

    Jiang, A. Q., Sablayrolles, A., Mensch, A., Bamford, C., Chaplot, D. S., de las Casas, D., Bressand, F., Lengyel, G., Lample, G., Saulnier, L., Lavaud, L. R., Lachaux, M.-A., Stock, P., Scao, T. L., Lavril, T., Wang, T., Lacroix, T., and Sayed, W. E. Mistral 7b.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.06825,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv