Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

RainFusion: Adaptive Video Generation Acceleration via Multi-Dimensional Visual Redundancy

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read RainFusion identifies three sparse attention patterns per head, online and with no training, and reports over 2x faster attention in video diffusion models with about 0.2% VBench loss.

desk verdict The textural-head extension is a genuine, useful step beyond SVG, but the abstract's 'over 2x' speedup claim is contradicted by the paper's own tables and needs fixing before I'd trust the headline. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21036 v2 pith:QV2SWJBI submitted 2025-05-27 cs.CV cs.AI

Aiyue Chen , Bin Dong , Jingru Li , Jing Lin , Kun Tian , Yiwu Yao , Gongyi Wang This is my paper
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords videogenerationdiffusiontransformer3Dattentionsparsetraining-freeaccelerationvisualredundancyadaptiverecognitionVBench
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

Video diffusion models spend over 80% of their compute on 3D attention, whose cost grows quadratically with sequence length. RainFusion argues that most of that computation is wasted, because attention heads in video DiTs concentrate their scores in one of three repeating patterns: spatial (all locations in nearby frames), temporal (same local region across frames), or textural (a few important tokens attended by everyone). The paper proposes a training-free module, ARM, that classifies each head online from a tiny sample of queries and keys, then applies the matching sparse mask. On HunyuanVideo, OpenSoraPlan-1.2, and CogVideoX-5B, it reports over 2x attention speedup with VBench total score dropping by roughly 0.2-0.4 points, and it combines with cache-based acceleration for a further multiplicative gain.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the three-way head taxonomy plus the Adaptive Recognition Module (ARM) that picks among the three patterns. The taxonomy's defining score is the masked attention recall $$R' = \frac{S(Q',K',M')}{S(Q',K',M_{\mathrm{init}})},$$ computed on downsampled query/key sequences; $M'$ is the candidate spatial or temporal mask sampled to match the token subsampling, and $M_{\mathrm{init}}$ is the all-zero mask. A head is called temporal if its local recall beats $\alpha$, spatial if its global recall beats $\alpha$, and textural otherwise. The masks themselves are simple: a striped band for spatial and temporal heads, and a checkerboard interleaving $C=\{a_{ij}\mid (i\bmod\tau=k)\wedge(j\bmod\tau=k)\}$ for textural heads, which keeps every $\tau$-th row and column of key/value tokens so that discarded tokens can be reconstructed from their four nearest surviving neighbors. What this machinery does is convert an expensive online decision about where attention is redundant into a ~0.2% overhead computation over sampled tokens, making the sparsity pattern itself adaptive to prompt and timestep instead of fixed.

What would settle it

Compute, for a set of prompts and timesteps, the exact full attention recall for every head and compare it with the category ARM assigns from its downsampled query/key samples; if the agreement rate is low, or if the optimal threshold $\alpha$ shifts materially across prompts, timesteps, or the three testbed models, the online classification that carries RainFusion is not doing what the paper claims. A simpler counterpart: generate a video with fast global motion or scene cuts, where the first frame is not representative, and check whether temporal-head recall computed from first-frame tokens diverges from the full-sequence recall and video quality drops below the reported ~0.2% VBench loss.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that 3D full-sequence attention in video diffusion transformers is neither uniformly dense nor irreducibly complex: each attention head can be assigned, per inference step, to one of three sparse patterns. Spatial heads attend to all spatial locations in a small set of important frames; temporal heads attend to the same local window across all frames; textural heads assign high scores to a small set of tokens that carry prompt-relevant detail, which RainFusion approximates by keeping keys and values on a checkerboard lattice. ARM decides the assignment online: it subsamples queries and keys (first-frame tokens for the local pattern, equal-interval tokens for the global pattern), computes the softmax attention score on the downsampled pair, and measures how much of that score survives under each candidate mask. If the masked recall exceeds a threshold $\alpha$, the head is classified temporal first, then spatial, and otherwise textural. The paper reports that this schedule approximately doubles attention throughput across the three models considered while moving VBench total scores by less than half a percent, and that layering RainFusion under a cache-based method multiplies the two speedups.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that ARM's cheap, downsampled recall calculation faithfully predicts which sparse pattern the full attention head really has, for every prompt, timestep, and model; if that sampling proxy misclassifies heads, both the quality and the speedup of RainFusion break.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any 3D-attention video DiT can adopt RainFusion without retraining or calibration, so the reported attention speedup should transfer to future models of the same architecture class.
  • Because the recalled score decides the mask, sparsity adapts per prompt and per timestep; videos with more redundant content get larger effective speedups, and detailed scenes automatically route heads into the textural pattern.
  • RainFusion is orthogonal to cache-based acceleration: pairing its 1.84x attention speedup with a 1.3x cache method yields about 2.4x total speedup on HunyuanVideo at a 0.49% VBench loss, so the two redundancy-exploiting strategies stack.
  • Quality degrades as sparsity is raised: the paper's 1.85x configuration loses 0.21%, 2.5x loses 0.56%, and 3.0x loses 1.36%, giving users a tunable speed-quality operating point.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The single global threshold $\alpha$ is never given a value or a sensitivity study; a deployment guide would need to show how to re-tune ARM for models outside the three tested, and this is the most direct missing measurement.
  • Because ARM's local sample is taken from the first frame, videos whose early frames are unrepresentative (a scene that begins static and then moves, or a sudden cut) are the natural stress test; sampling local tokens from several frames instead would be a cheap extension.
  • The checkerboard textural mask is essentially a spatial downsampling of key/value tokens; combining it with token merging or low-rank approximations that exploit a different axis of redundancy may push beyond the demonstrated 3.0x attention speedup.
  • Attention-computation speedup is not wall-clock speedup; since attention is about 80% of inference cost, a 2x attention speedup gives roughly 1.6x end-to-end at best, and the paper does not report end-to-end latency.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes RainFusion, a training-free sparse attention method for 3D-attention video diffusion transformers. It classifies attention heads online into spatial, temporal, and textural categories via ARM, which computes approximate recall on downsampled query/key tokens, then applies fixed masks (striped spatial/temporal, checkerboard textural) to reduce attention computation. Experiments on CogVideoX-5B, OpenSoraPlan-1.2, and HunyuanVideo report VBench quality losses of about 0.2--0.4 points and attention speedups of 1.84--1.91x for standalone RainFusion, with 2.37x when combined with Delta-DiT. The abstract claims 'over 2x speedup in attention computation,' which is contradicted by the paper's own tables.

Significance. If the results hold, RainFusion is a useful plug-and-play acceleration for video DiTs, with negligible quality loss on VBench and orthogonality to caching methods such as Delta-DiT. The paper's strengths include evaluation on three open models, comparisons to DiTFastAttn and Delta-DiT, use of the external VBench benchmark, and a claimed ARM overhead of about 0.2%. However, the headline speedup is overstated relative to the reported measurements, and the ARM proxy's robustness and the unstated threshold parameters are insufficiently characterized. The closest baseline, SVG, is absent from the quantitative comparison. These issues must be addressed before the significance claims can be accepted as stated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; Section 4.1; Table 1] The abstract states that RainFusion 'achieves over 2x speedup in attention computation,' but Table 1 reports standalone RainFusion attention speedups of 1.85x (CogVideoX-5B), 1.91x (OpenSoraPlan-1.2), 1.89x (HunyuanVideo), and 1.84x (RainFusion+ on HunyuanVideo). The only entry exceeding 2x is the combined RainFusion+ & Delta-DiT row at 2.37x, which also includes a caching method. Section 4.1 explicitly states that the default configuration 'corresponds to about 1.85x speedup in attention,' directly contradicting the abstract. The claim should be corrected to reflect the measured standalone speedups, or the abstract should specify that 2x is achieved only when RainFusion is combined with a caching method such as Delta-DiT.
  2. [Section 3.3; Algorithm 1; Eq. (6)] The ARM recall threshold alpha in Algorithm 1 is never specified, and the global sampling interval omega is not reported. Since alpha determines head classification and therefore both speedup and quality, the experiments are not reproducible, and the assertion in Section 3.3 that the downsampled attention score 'serves as an approximation of the overall attention score' is not supported by any error analysis or sensitivity study. The paper should report alpha and omega and include a sensitivity analysis showing that head classifications and VBench scores are stable over reasonable choices. Without this, the central quality-preservation claim rests on an unstated hyperparameter.
  3. [Section 4.3; Table 1; Sections 2.3 and 4.2] SVG is identified in Sections 2.3 and 4.2 as the closest prior sparse-attention method, and the paper claims RainFusion outperforms it, but Table 1 contains no SVG quantitative results. The ablation configuration described as 'similar to SVG' is not compared numerically against SVG under identical conditions. Since SVG is the most direct baseline for the online-profiling component, omitting it from the quantitative comparison makes the superiority claim unsubstantiated. Please add SVG results under the same evaluation settings as the other baselines.
  4. [Section 4.1; Tables 1 and 3] The paper states in Section 4.1 that 'we only use one random seed instead of five in all the following experiments.' Given that the reported VBench quality losses are 0.2--0.4 points, a single seed provides no estimate of variance, and the differences between RainFusion and baseline may be within run-to-run noise. The claim of 'minimal impact' on quality would be more convincing with multiple seeds and error bars, or at minimum a justification for why VBench scores are stable enough for single-seed comparisons on the subset of dimensions used.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Tables 1 and 3] The default 1.85x RainFusion row in Table 3 reports an average VBench loss of -0.21 for CogVideoX-5B, while Table 1 reports -0.28 for the same model. The paper should state the prompt set used in each table (for example, 48 Sora prompts for ablations versus all 946 VBench prompts) to avoid an apparent inconsistency.
  2. [Section 4.1; Eq. (4)] The default textural stride tau is not stated explicitly. The text says key-value tokens are reduced by half via the checkerboard layout, which implies tau=2, but Eq. (4) defines tau generally. Please state the default value of tau for the 50% sparsity configuration.
  3. [Table 3; Figure 7] The text says the 3.0x configuration has a 1.35% loss, while Table 3 reports -1.36; the caption of Figure 7 says '3.00x' while the table says '3.0x.' These small inconsistencies should be corrected.
  4. [Eq. (6)] In Eq. (6), the notation S is used for both the numerator and denominator, but the denominator uses the all-zero mask Minit. Clarify this by explicitly writing S(Q', K', Minit) in the denominator to avoid confusion.
  5. [References] References [5] and [6] both refer to Delta-DiT but with different titles and one is an arXiv preprint while the other is undated. These should be consolidated into a single reference.
  6. [Figure 1 caption] The caption says 'RainFusion results' but the figure shows RainFusion combined with Delta-DiT. Please make clear which configuration is visualized.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: quality and speedup are externally measured; score 2 reflects only a minor non-load-bearing self-citation and an abstract/table overstatement.

full rationale

RainFusion's derivation chain is self-contained. The three head patterns (Spatial, Temporal, Textural) are presented as empirical observations of attention score maps (Section 3.1, Figure 3) rather than as consequences of fitted parameters, and Algorithm 1 is an online classification rule built on those observed masks, not a prediction derived from its own inputs. The reported quality impact is measured against the external VBench benchmark (Section 4.1), and the speedups in Table 1 are measured runtimes for the stated default configuration ('we set the sparsity to 50% and we keep the first 10% timesteps using dense calculation, which corresponds to about 1.85x speedup in attention'). No equation in the paper reduces an output to a fitted value or to a self-citation. The only shared-author citation, RazorAttention [32], appears in the related-work survey and is not load-bearing for any claim. The abstract's 'over 2x speedup' is inconsistent with the standalone 1.84-1.91x rows in Table 1, and the ARM recall threshold alpha is never specified, but these are correctness and reproducibility concerns, not circularity. Score 2 reflects the minor non-load-bearing self-citation and the loose abstract wording, not a circular derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central method is an empirical heuristic. Its performance rests on a set of hand-set hyperparameters (bandwidth, stride, dense fraction, ARM threshold) and on the domain assumptions that video DiT attention heads follow the three observed patterns and that sampled recall is a faithful proxy. No machine-checked proofs or shipped artifacts are provided. The balance of contributed mechanism versus assumed structure is therefore moderate.

free parameters (6)
  • ARM recall threshold alpha = not specified
    Algorithm 1 classifies heads as temporal if bR is at least alpha, spatial if eR is at least alpha, else textural; alpha is not reported and appears hand-tuned, and it controls the quality-speed tradeoff.
  • Spatial and temporal mask bandwidth = 1/4 (default)
    Section 4.1 sets bandwidth = 1/4 in both local and global patterns, corresponding to 9/16 computation reduction; this is a hand-set hyperparameter.
  • Textural checkerboard stride tau = 2 (default, reducing KV by half)
    Section 3.2 defines checkerboard retention; default reduces key and value tokens by half, and ablation varies stride to 3 and 4 for higher speedup.
  • Dense timestep fraction = 10%
    Section 4.1 keeps the first 10% of timesteps dense; this hand-set hyperparameter affects both speed and quality.
  • Global sampling interval omega and local frame subset = not specified
    ARM global sampling draws tokens at equal intervals omega; omega is not reported, so the approximate recall computation is not fully specified.
  • RainFusion+ dynamic bandwidth thresholds = 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 90% recall target
    Section 4.3 selects the minimum bandwidth maintaining 90% recall for each head; these thresholds are fit per setting and are not derived from a theory.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Video DiT attention heads can be reliably partitioned into three recurring sparse patterns: spatial, temporal, and textural.
    Observed in attention score maps (Figures 3 and 4) for selected models; not proven and could vary by prompt, timestep, or model.
  • domain assumption Approximate attention scores computed from first-frame or equal-interval sampled queries and keys accurately represent full attention for head classification.
    Section 3.3 states downsampled sequences serve as an approximation; no error bound or validation across sampling rates and timesteps is provided.
  • domain assumption Checkerboard key and value retention lets discarded tokens be implicitly reconstructed from the four nearest retained tokens.
    Section 3.2 states this as a plausible heuristic; the quality of textural heads depends on this reconstruction, which is not formally justified.
  • standard math Softmax attention is the relevant cost model with O(N^2) complexity.
    Equation (1) and Section 3.1; this is standard and uncontroversial.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of RainFusion: Adaptive Video Generation Acceleration via Multi-Dimensional Visual Redundancy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QV2SWJBI

@misc{pith2026250521036,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: RainFusion: Adaptive Video Generation Acceleration via Multi-Dimensional Visual Redundancy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QV2SWJBI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21036}
}
abstract

Video generation using diffusion models is highly computationally intensive, with 3D attention in Diffusion Transformer (DiT) models accounting for over 80\% of the total computational resources. In this work, we introduce {\bf RainFusion}, a novel training-free sparse attention method that exploits inherent sparsity nature in visual data to accelerate attention computation while preserving video quality. Specifically, we identify three unique sparse patterns in video generation attention calculations--Spatial Pattern, Temporal Pattern and Textural Pattern. The sparse pattern for each attention head is determined online with negligible overhead (\textasciitilde\,0.2\%) with our proposed {\bf ARM} (Adaptive Recognition Module) during inference. Our proposed {\bf RainFusion} is a plug-and-play method, that can be seamlessly integrated into state-of-the-art 3D-attention video generation models without additional training or calibration. We evaluate our method on leading open-sourced models including HunyuanVideo, OpenSoraPlan-1.2 and CogVideoX-5B, demonstrating its broad applicability and effectiveness. Experimental results show that RainFusion achieves over {\bf 2\(\times\)} speedup in attention computation while maintaining video quality, with only a minimal impact on VBench scores (-0.2\%).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21036 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. HunyuanVideo 720p RainFusion results. RainFusion [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) RainFusion pipeline including Adaptive Recognition Module(ARM) and applying sparse pattern to Flash Attention. (b) ARM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The attention sparsity pattern with the vertical axis and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The above figure shows the attention score map of a typ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Video Comparison using CogVideoX-5B with different accelerating algorithms. Left prompt: “A steam train moving on a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: RainFusion video comparisons on CogVideoX-5B. Two Head means only use spatial and temporal head similar to SVG. We [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Video Comparison using CogVideoX-5B with different speedup ratio. Left prompt: “A cat waking up its sleeping owner [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. PAROAttention: Pattern-Aware ReOrdering for Efficient Sparse and Quantized Attention in Visual Generation Models

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    PAROAttention permutes tokens along frame, height, and width axes to make visual attention block-wise, enabling sparse and INT8/INT4 quantized attention with near-baseline generation quality.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets, 2023

    Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Sumith Kulal, Daniel Mendelevitch, Maciej Kilian, Dominik Lorenz, Yam Levi, Zion English, Vikram V oleti, Adam Letts, Varun Jampani, and Robin Rombach. Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets, 2023. 1

    2023

  2. [2]

    Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127, 2023

    Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Sumith Kulal, Daniel Mendelevitch, Maciej Kilian, Dominik Lorenz, Yam Levi, Zion English, Vikram V oleti, Adam Letts, et al. Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127, 2023. 3

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Token merging for fast sta- ble diffusion

    Daniel Bolya and Judy Hoffman. Token merging for fast sta- ble diffusion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 4599–4603,

  4. [4]

    Pixart-σ: Weak-to-strong training of diffusion transformer for 4k text-to-image generation

    Junsong Chen, Chongjian Ge, Enze Xie, Yue Wu, Lewei Yao, Xiaozhe Ren, Zhongdao Wang, Ping Luo, Huchuan Lu, and Zhenguo Li. Pixart-σ: Weak-to-strong training of diffusion transformer for 4k text-to-image generation. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 74–91. Springer, 2024. 3

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Pengtao Chen, Mingzhu Shen, Peng Ye, Jianjian Cao, Chongjun Tu, Christos-Savvas Bouganis, Yiren Zhao, and Tao Chen.δ-dit: A training-free acceleration method tailored for diffusion transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01125,

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    Pengtao Chen, Mingzhu Shen, Peng Ye, Jianjian Cao, Chongjun Tu, Christos-Savvas Bouganis, Yiren Zhao, and Tao Chen.δ-dit: A training-free acceleration method tai- lored for diffusion transformers, 2024. 2, 5

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Sparsevit: Revisiting activation spar- sity for efficient high-resolution vision transformer

    Xuanyao Chen, Zhijian Liu, Haotian Tang, Li Yi, Hang Zhao, and Song Han. Sparsevit: Revisiting activation spar- sity for efficient high-resolution vision transformer. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 2061–2070, 2023. 3

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Guided diffusion models

    Prafulla Dhariwal, Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Guided diffusion models. InNeurIPS, 2022. 3

    work page 2022

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Streamingt2v: Con- sistent, dynamic, and extendable long video generation from text, 2024

    Roberto Henschel, Levon Khachatryan, Daniil Hayrapetyan, Hayk Poghosyan, Vahram Tadevosyan, Zhangyang Wang, Shant Navasardyan, and Humphrey Shi. Streamingt2v: Con- sistent, dynamic, and extendable long video generation from text, 2024. 1

    2024

  2. [10]

    Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020. 3

    2020

  3. [11]

    Vbench: Com- prehensive benchmark suite for video generative models,

    Ziqi Huang, Yinan He, Jiashuo Yu, Fan Zhang, Chenyang Si, Yuming Jiang, Yuanhan Zhang, Tianxing Wu, Qingyang Jin, Nattapol Chanpaisit, Yaohui Wang, Xinyuan Chen, Limin Wang, Dahua Lin, Yu Qiao, and Ziwei Liu. Vbench: Com- prehensive benchmark suite for video generative models,

  4. [12]

    Abdi, Dongsheng Li, Chin-Yew Lin, Yuqing Yang, and Lili Qiu

    Huiqiang Jiang, Yucheng Li, Chengruidong Zhang, Qianhui Wu, Xufang Luo, Surin Ahn, Zhenhua Han, Amir H. Abdi, Dongsheng Li, Chin-Yew Lin, Yuqing Yang, and Lili Qiu. Minference 1.0: Accelerating pre-filling for long-context llms via dynamic sparse attention, 2024. 3

    2024

  5. [13]

    Ryoo, and Tian Xie

    Kumara Kahatapitiya, Haozhe Liu, Sen He, Ding Liu, Menglin Jia, Chenyang Zhang, Michael S. Ryoo, and Tian Xie. Adaptive caching for faster video generation with dif- fusion transformers, 2024. 2, 3

    2024

  6. [14]

    Hunyuanvideo: A systematic framework for large video generative models, 2025

    Weijie Kong, Qi Tian, Zijian Zhang, Rox Min, Zuozhuo Dai, Jin Zhou, Jiangfeng Xiong, Xin Li, Bo Wu, Jianwei Zhang, Kathrina Wu, Qin Lin, Junkun Yuan, Yanxin Long, Aladdin Wang, Andong Wang, Changlin Li, Duojun Huang, Fang Yang, Hao Tan, Hongmei Wang, Jacob Song, Jiawang Bai, J...

    2025

  7. [15]

    Autodiffusion: Training-free optimization of time steps and architectures for automated diffusion model accelera- tion, 2023

    Lijiang Li, Huixia Li, Xiawu Zheng, Jie Wu, Xuefeng Xiao, Rui Wang, Min Zheng, Xin Pan, Fei Chao, and Rongrong Ji. Autodiffusion: Training-free optimization of time steps and architectures for automated diffusion model accelera- tion, 2023. 2

    2023

  8. [16]

    Timestep embedding tells: It’s time to cache for video diffusion model, 2024

    Feng Liu, Shiwei Zhang, Xiaofeng Wang, Yujie Wei, Haonan Qiu, Yuzhong Zhao, Yingya Zhang, Qixiang Ye, and Fang Wan. Timestep embedding tells: It’s time to cache for video diffusion model, 2024. 2, 3

    2024

  9. [17]

    Faster diffu- sion via temporal attention decomposition.arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2404, 2024

    Haozhe Liu, Wentian Zhang, Jinheng Xie, Francesco Fac- cio, Mengmeng Xu, Tao Xiang, Mike Zheng Shou, Juan- Manuel Perez-Rua, and J ¨urgen Schmidhuber. Faster diffu- sion via temporal attention decomposition.arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2404, 2024. 3

    2024

  10. [18]

    Inference-time scaling for diffu- sion models beyond scaling denoising steps.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09732, 2025

    Nanye Ma, Shangyuan Tong, Haolin Jia, Hexiang Hu, Yu- Chuan Su, Mingda Zhang, Xuan Yang, Yandong Li, Tommi Jaakkola, Xuhui Jia, et al. Inference-time scaling for diffu- sion models beyond scaling denoising steps.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09732, 2025. 3

    2025 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Learning-to-cache: Accelerating diffusion trans- former via layer caching.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01733,

    Xinyin Ma, Gongfan Fang, Michael Bi Mi, and Xinchao Wang. Learning-to-cache: Accelerating diffusion trans- former via layer caching.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01733,

    arXiv

  12. [20]

    Deepcache: Accelerating diffusion models for free

    Xinyin Ma, Gongfan Fang, and Xinchao Wang. Deepcache: Accelerating diffusion models for free. InThe IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,

  13. [21]

    Latte: La- tent diffusion transformer for video generation, 2024

    Xin Ma, Yaohui Wang, Gengyun Jia, Xinyuan Chen, Ziwei Liu, Yuan-Fang Li, Cunjian Chen, and Yu Qiao. Latte: La- tent diffusion transformer for video generation, 2024. 1

    2024

  14. [22]

    Improved denoising diffusion probabilistic models

    Alexander Quinn Nichol and Prafulla Dhariwal. Improved denoising diffusion probabilistic models. InInternational conference on machine learning, pages 8162–8171. PMLR,

  15. [23]

    Sora prompt, 2024

    Open-Sora. Sora prompt, 2024. 5

    2024

  16. [24]

    OpenAI. Openai. sora, 2024. 1, 3

    2024

  17. [25]

    Scalable diffusion models with transformers

    William Peebles and Saining Xie. Scalable diffusion models with transformers. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Inter- national Conference on Computer Vision, pages 4195–4205,

  18. [26]

    Open-sora plan, 2024

    Open-Sora Plan. Open-sora plan, 2024. 1, 3, 5

    2024

  19. [27]

    Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion mod- els for high-resolution image synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01952, 2023

    Dustin Podell, Zion English, Kyle Lacey, Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Jonas M ¨uller, Joe Penna, and Robin Rombach. Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion mod- els for high-resolution image synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01952, 2023. 3

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Sampson, Shikai Li, Simone Parmeggiani, Steve Fine, Tara Fowler, Vladan Petro- vic, and Yuming Du

    Adam Polyak, Amit Zohar, Andrew Brown, Andros Tjandra, Animesh Sinha, Ann Lee, Apoorv Vyas, Bowen Shi, Chih- Yao Ma, Ching-Yao Chuang, David Yan, Dhruv Choudhary, Dingkang Wang, Geet Sethi, Guan Pang, Haoyu Ma, Ishan Misra, Ji Hou, Jialiang Wang, Kiran Jagadeesh, Kunpeng Li, L...

    2024

  21. [29]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj ¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022. 3

    2022

  22. [30]

    Align your steps: Optimizing sampling schedules in diffusion mod- els, 2024

    Amirmojtaba Sabour, Sanja Fidler, and Karsten Kreis. Align your steps: Optimizing sampling schedules in diffusion mod- els, 2024. 2

    2024

  23. [31]

    Todo: Token downsampling for efficient generation of high-resolution im- ages.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13573, 2024

    Ethan Smith, Nayan Saxena, and Aninda Saha. Todo: Token downsampling for efficient generation of high-resolution im- ages.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.13573, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Razorattention: Ef- ficient kv cache compression through retrieval heads.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15891, 2024

    Hanlin Tang, Yang Lin, Jing Lin, Qingsen Han, Shikuan Hong, Yiwu Yao, and Gongyi Wang. Razorattention: Ef- ficient kv cache compression through retrieval heads.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.15891, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    U-dits: Downsample tokens in u-shaped diffusion transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02730,

    Yuchuan Tian, Zhijun Tu, Hanting Chen, Jie Hu, Chao Xu, and Yunhe Wang. U-dits: Downsample tokens in u-shaped diffusion transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02730,

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Accelerating trans- formers with spectrum-preserving token merging.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:30772–30810,

    Chau Tran, Duy MH Nguyen, Manh-Duy Nguyen, TrungTin Nguyen, Ngan Le, Pengtao Xie, Daniel Sonntag, James Y Zou, Binh Nguyen, and Mathias Niepert. Accelerating trans- formers with spectrum-preserving token merging.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37:30772–30810,

  27. [35]

    Attention-driven training-free efficiency enhancement of diffusion models

    Hongjie Wang, Difan Liu, Yan Kang, Yijun Li, Zhe Lin, Ni- raj K Jha, and Yuchen Liu. Attention-driven training-free efficiency enhancement of diffusion models. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition, pages 16080–16089, 2024. 3

    2024

  28. [36]

    Cache me if you can: Accel- erating diffusion models through block caching

    Felix Wimbauer, Bichen Wu, Edgar Schoenfeld, Xiaoliang Dai, Ji Hou, Zijian He, Artsiom Sanakoyeu, Peizhao Zhang, Sam Tsai, Jonas Kohler, et al. Cache me if you can: Accel- erating diffusion models through block caching. InProceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi...

    2024

  29. [37]

    Importance-based token merging for diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.16720, 2024

    Haoyu Wu, Jingyi Xu, Hieu Le, and Dimitris Samaras. Importance-based token merging for diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.16720, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Sparse videogen: Accelerating video diffusion transformers with spatial-temporal sparsity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01776, 2025

    Haocheng Xi, Shuo Yang, Yilong Zhao, Chenfeng Xu, Muyang Li, Xiuyu Li, Yujun Lin, Han Cai, Jintao Zhang, Dacheng Li, et al. Sparse videogen: Accelerating video diffusion transformers with spatial-temporal sparsity.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01776, 2025. 2, 4, 6

    2025 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models with an expert transformer, 2024

    Zhuoyi Yang, Jiayan Teng, Wendi Zheng, Ming Ding, Shiyu Huang, Jiazheng Xu, Yuanming Yang, Wenyi Hong, Xiaohan Zhang, Guanyu Feng, Da Yin, Xiaotao Gu, Yuxuan Zhang, Weihan Wang, Yean Cheng, Ting Liu, Bin Xu, Yuxiao Dong, and Jie Tang. Cogvideox: Text-to-video diffusion models ...

    2024

  32. [40]

    Ditfastattn: Attention compression for diffusion transformer models, 2024

    Zhihang Yuan, Hanling Zhang, Pu Lu, Xuefei Ning, Lin- feng Zhang, Tianchen Zhao, Shengen Yan, Guohao Dai, and Yu Wang. Ditfastattn: Attention compression for diffusion transformer models, 2024. 2, 3, 5

    2024

  33. [41]

    Oats: Outlier-aware pruning through sparse and low rank decomposition.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.13652, 2024

    Stephen Zhang and Vardan Papyan. Oats: Outlier-aware pruning through sparse and low rank decomposition.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.13652, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Open-sora: Democratizing efficient video production for all.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.20404, 2024

    Zangwei Zheng, Xiangyu Peng, Tianji Yang, Chenhui Shen, Shenggui Li, Hongxin Liu, Yukun Zhou, Tianyi Li, and Yang You. Open-sora: Democratizing efficient video production for all.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.20404, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.