Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 58 references

A training-free gate that times token commits from the denoising trajectory, not snapshot confidence alone, improves quality and speed in diffusion language models.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-12 03:55 UTC pith:UKR4KCAZ

load-bearing objection Clean training-free commit gate for dLLMs that separates token identity from timing; real gains under confidence decoding, mixed under KLASS, with the usual irreversible-commit risk left mostly correlational. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.03236 v1 pith:UKR4KCAZ submitted 2026-07-03 cs.CL

TACG: Trajectory-Aware Commit Gating for Diffusion Language Model Decoding

Chengcheng Wang , Tingzhang Luo , Wenhao Li , Jianyuan Guo , Chang Xu This is my paper
classification cs.CL
keywords diffusion language modelsmasked diffusiondecodingcommit gatingtraining-free inferencetrajectory signalstokens per forwardconfidence threshold
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 language models unmask many positions in parallel over a trajectory of predictive distributions, yet most decoders still decide only from the latest snapshot. That practice confuses a brief high-confidence peak with readiness to lock a token into the permanent context. This paper claims the historical trajectory already carries usable readiness signals: how long a proposal has stayed fixed, and whether current logits reinforce that proposal relative to an exponential moving average of past logits. Trajectory-Aware Commit Gating (TACG) keeps the written token equal to the base model’s top-1 proposal and uses those signals only to decide when the position may leave the mask, with a hard cap on extra promotions. Across code and math benchmarks on several diffusion LMs the gate typically raises or holds accuracy while cutting denoising steps and raising tokens written per forward pass, without extra networks or forwards.

Core claim

Commitment readiness is a distinct decoder decision from token identity in non-revising diffusion language models, and it can be estimated from the model’s own denoising trajectory. Anchoring identity to the base posterior while gating unmasking with Temporal Implicit Logits Guidance (EMA logit self-reference scored only on the base proposal) plus a short History Gate of proposal persistence, under a capped extra-promotion budget, yields a stability-constrained rule that typically improves or preserves accuracy and raises tokens per forward.

What carries the argument

Trajectory-Aware Commit Gating (TACG): base posterior proposes the token; TILG contrasts current logits against an EMA self-reference in natural-parameter space to score temporal support for that proposal; a History Gate requires short-term proposal persistence (with a confidence escape); at most K_extra further positions are promoted by readiness score si = confidence + λ × temporal support.

Load-bearing premise

Short-term proposal persistence and the contrast of current logits against an exponential average of past logits are reliable enough proxies for commitment readiness that promoting a few extra candidates by that score will not systematically lock in irreversible early errors.

What would settle it

On the same LLaDA, Dream, and LLaDA2-Mini code and math setups, if ranking the extra-promotion set by random scores or by confidence alone matches or beats TACG’s accuracy and tokens-per-forward, or if removing TILG and the History Gate erases the gains reported on HumanEval and MATH500, the trajectory-readiness claim fails.

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

If this is right

  • Confidence-threshold and schedule-based diffusion-LM decoders can be upgraded at the gate level without retraining or extra model forwards.
  • Temporal support for the proposed token is complementary to whole-distribution stability signals, so the two can be stacked.
  • A hard per-step cap on extra promotions bounds the additional risk of early irreversible commits while still allowing selective acceleration.
  • The same gate transfers to both full-sequence and block diffusion models and across code and math tasks.
  • When the gate reveals ready positions earlier without creating recovery work, denoising steps fall and tokens per forward rise.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the written token never changes, residual early errors still come from the base posterior under incomplete context; limited revision would be the natural partner to trajectory gating.
  • The EMA logit contrast is used only for timing, not for re-choosing the token; the same contrast idea could score readiness in other iterative generators that expose belief trajectories.
  • If short-horizon persistence fails on long-range dependencies, group-level or dependency-aware promotion is the direct next experiment suggested by the paper’s own limitations.
  • Step-count and tokens-per-forward gains may not fully appear in wall-clock time until the O(BLV) EMA reference is fused or sparsified.

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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Trajectory-Aware Commit Gating (TACG), a training-free gate-level decoder for masked diffusion language models. It separates token identity from commit timing: the base posterior always proposes the written token (argmax of pt), while trajectory signals decide whether that proposal is ready to unmask. Temporal Implicit Logits Guidance (TILG) maintains an EMA of past logits as a self-reference and scores signed temporal support for the base proposal via a CFG-shaped auxiliary readout used only for gating; a History Gate (HG) requires short-term proposal persistence (with a confidence escape); and a capped extra-promotion budget Kextra ranks candidates by readiness si = ci + λσi. Evaluated as a plug-in over confidence and KLASS gates on LLaDA, Dream, and LLaDA2-Mini across HumanEval, MBPP, GSM8K, and MATH500, TACG typically improves or preserves accuracy while reducing denoising steps and raising tokens per forward, with ablations, sensitivity plots, a longer-generation check, and public code.

Significance. If the results hold, TACG is a useful, low-overhead contribution to training-free DLLM decoding: it cleanly reframes commit timing as distinct from token identity, exploits already-available logit trajectories without auxiliary networks or extra forwards, and shows multi-model, multi-task gains especially under confidence gates. Strengths include the explicit identity/timing separation, complementary positioning relative to KL-style stability (KLASS), component ablations (Table 3), hyperparameter sensitivity (Figs. 3–4), block-diffusion transfer on LLaDA2-Mini (Table 2), longer-generation validation (Table 4), and a public implementation. The work is incremental relative to recent stability/margin/lookahead decoders, but the trajectory-as-readiness framing and capped extra-promotion rule are concrete and practically relevant for non-revising DLLM inference.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.5, Table 1, Fig. 1] §4.5 / Eqs. (12)–(18) and Table 1: the central claim that promoting by si = ci + λσi within |Et| ≤ Kextra is net-safe under non-revising decoding is supported mainly by end-to-end accuracy, not by an audit of extra-promotion quality. Fig. 1 / §2 only shows higher token-level match for higher history support within matched confidence bins on a GSM8K diagnostic subset (correlational). Please report, at least for confidence+TACG on one code and one math task: (i) fraction of commits coming from Et vs Bt, (ii) token-level error rate of Et vs Bt (or vs baseline commits at the same positions), and (iii) whether early Et errors cascade into later context failures. Appendix B.7’s Kextra ϵt sketch is not a substitute for this measurement.
  2. [§5.1–5.2, Table 1] §5.1–5.2 and Table 1: under KLASS the efficiency story is mixed and sometimes adverse (e.g., LLaDA KLASS MATH500 steps 127.70→133.33, TPF 2.52→2.43; GSM8K steps 98.51→106.66, TPF 2.74→2.51; Dream KLASS GSM8K Acc 79.68→78.62). The abstract’s “typically … reducing denoising steps and increasing TPF” is therefore gate-dependent. Please state more precisely when TACG is expected to accelerate vs. only re-rank under an already structured base gate, and either (a) retune the extra-promotion policy for KLASS or (b) present confidence-gate results as the primary claim with KLASS as a complementarity check.
  3. [§4.7, Tables 1–2, 4] §4.7 and efficiency columns in Tables 1–2, 4–5: steps and TPF are treated as primary efficiency metrics, while the paper correctly notes O(BLV) EMA/support overhead and that these are “algorithmic efficiency indicators rather than complete system-throughput measurements.” For a decoding paper whose selling point includes acceleration, at least one wall-clock or tokens/sec comparison (same hardware, same batch settings as Table 4’s H200 run) is needed to confirm that TILG+HG overhead does not erase the reported step reductions, especially at large V.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figure 2] Figure 2 caption/labels contain typos (“collexted”, “pre-softmax” layout noise). Clean the figure text before camera-ready.
  2. [§4.2–4.4] Eq. (1) vs. Eqs. (4)–(5)/(12): the main text switches between the abstract qt ∝ pt^{1+w}/pref^w form, the softmax(zt + λ[zt − z̄]) form, and the probability-gain bi. A single default formula in §4 with the log-ratio variant deferred to the appendix would reduce ambiguity.
  3. [Table 1] Table 1 d3LLM† rows report Acc and sometimes TPF but omit Steps; the comparison is hard to interpret. Either fill Steps or mark the baseline as quality-only.
  4. [Table 3] Table 3 TPF values are printed to excessive precision (e.g., 6.4534); round consistently with Table 1.
  5. [§5 / Appendix C] Hyperparameter defaults (λ, β, w, m_base/m_extra, τ_floor, Kextra, τ_esc) should be listed in one place (main text or appendix table) for each model/gate setting used in Table 1.
  6. [§3] Related Work is thorough; a short explicit contrast table (signal used, revises token identity?, extra forward?, training-free?) versus Prophet, KLASS, LookUM, Fast-dLLM would help readers place TACG.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: TACG is an engineered commit gate evaluated on external benchmarks, not a derivation that reduces to its own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing chain is design-plus-empirical-evaluation, not a first-principles derivation that closes on itself. Token identity is defined as the base posterior argmax (Eq. 7); TILG support (Eqs. 1, 8–12) and History Gate persistence (Eqs. 3, 14–15) are constructed signals used only to gate commit timing; the capped extra-promotion rule (Eqs. 16–18) is an explicit budget, not a fitted law renamed as prediction. Appendix B records algebraic identities of that construction (log-odds form, small-w expansion, gauge invariance, contrast with KL) and an intentionally loose expected-error sketch (B.7), none of which claim to recover a true posterior or optimal stopping solution. Motivation from the GSM8K diagnostic (Fig. 1 / §2) is correlational and is not the sole evaluation set: accuracy, steps, and TPF are reported on HumanEval, MBPP, GSM8K, and MATH500 across LLaDA, Dream, and LLaDA2-Mini under confidence and KLASS bases (Tables 1–4), with ablations and sensitivity sweeps. Hyperparameters (λ, β, m_base/m_extra, K_extra, τ_floor) are free knobs, which is normal for decoding work and does not make the accuracy claims tautological. There is no self-definitional loop, no fitted constant re-sold as a prediction of a related quantity, no load-bearing uniqueness theorem from overlapping authors, and no renaming of a known result as unification. Residual risk is empirical (whether short-horizon proxies systematically lock irreversible errors in non-revising decoders), not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 5 axioms · 3 invented entities

The central empirical claim rests on standard MDLM decoding assumptions plus several hand-chosen gate hyperparameters and the modeling choice that trajectory persistence/EMA contrast measure readiness without changing token identity. No new physical entities; invented pieces are algorithmic components with experimental (not external theoretical) support.

free parameters (6)
  • support weight λ in readiness si = ci + λσi
    Controls how much temporal support can promote early commits; sensitivity shown in Fig. 3 but value is chosen, not derived.
  • EMA decay β for logit reference
    Sets historical memory of TILG; Fig. 4 shows sensitivity; hand-tuned.
  • TILG contrast weight w
    Strength of current-vs-reference contrast in the auxiliary readout; free gate hyperparameter.
  • History Gate lengths m_base / m_extra and escape τ_esc
    Persistence windows and confidence escape that define stable vs extra candidates; chosen for trade-off.
  • confidence floor τ_floor and extra budget Kextra
    Bound the candidate pool and per-step acceleration risk; explicit free acceleration budget.
  • base confidence threshold (e.g. 0.9) / KLASS base gate settings
    Underlying snapshot gate that TACG wraps; results depend on this base policy.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Non-revising DLLM decoding: once a token is committed it conditions later steps and is not corrected.
    Stated in §4.1; makes commit timing load-bearing for quality.
  • ad hoc to paper Token identity should remain argmax of the base posterior; trajectory signals should only gate when to unmask.
    Core design premise of TACG (§1, §4.1); alternative would re-sample from qt.
  • ad hoc to paper EMA of past logits is a valid self-reference for temporal belief innovation in natural-parameter space.
    §4.2–4.4; motivated by diagnostics and log-odds identities, not proved optimal.
  • domain assumption Short consecutive proposal persistence indicates higher commitment reliability beyond snapshot confidence.
    Supported by GSM8K diagnostic Fig. 1 / §2; treated as general enough for code and math tasks.
  • ad hoc to paper Capping |Et| ≤ Kextra sufficiently bounds extra early-error risk for practical use.
    Appendix B.7 gives a loose expected-error bound; not a formal safety guarantee.
invented entities (3)
  • Temporal Implicit Logits Guidance (TILG) readiness score no independent evidence
    purpose: Score whether the base proposal is gaining support vs an EMA historical reference without changing the written token.
    New algorithmic signal; independent evidence is only the paper’s ablations/benchmarks, not an external theory.
  • History Gate (HG) persistence constraint no independent evidence
    purpose: Require short-term proposal stability (with confidence escape) before base or extra commit.
    Gate-level construct introduced to regularize TILG promotions; validated only inside this study.
  • Capped extra-promotion set Et under readiness ranking no independent evidence
    purpose: Allow bounded acceleration beyond the base accept set using si = ci + λσi.
    Policy object that implements the stability-constrained acceleration claim.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 22836 in / 3493 out tokens · 29703 ms · 2026-07-12T03:55:18.410099+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Diffusion language models (DLLMs) generate text by iteratively denoising masked positions, exposing a trajectory of predictive distributions rather than a single instantaneous belief. Most existing decoders ignore this trajectory and commit tokens from the current snapshot alone, conflating confidence with commitment readiness: a transient top-1 peak under incomplete context can be locked in, while candidates with consistent cross-step support are delayed. We propose Trajectory-Aware Commit Gating (TACG), a training-free gate-level decoder that anchors token identities to the base posterior and uses trajectory-aware signals only to decide whether the current proposal is ready to commit. TACG combines Temporal Implicit Logits Guidance (TILG), which keeps an exponential moving average of past logits as a self-reference and contrasts the current logits against this reference in natural-parameter space, with a History Gate (HG) that enforces short-term proposal persistence before commitment. Together with a capped extra-promotion budget, these components yield a stability-constrained commit rule without auxiliary networks or extra forward passes. We evaluate TACG on LLaDA, Dream, and LLaDA2-Mini across code (HumanEval, MBPP) and math (GSM8K, MATH500) benchmarks; it typically improves or preserves accuracy while reducing denoising steps and increasing tokens per forward (TPF). The code is publicly available at https://github.com/Clarence-CV/TACG-DLLM.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.03236 by Chang Xu, Chengcheng Wang, Jianyuan Guo, Tingzhang Luo, Wenhao Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Diagnostic historical signals on GSM8K. Higher history gate and history-logit support [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: TACG mechanism with a TILG temporal-support branch. The base posterior first proposes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Sensitivity to support weight λ and confidence floor on HumanEval. TACG remains stable under appropriate parameter combina￾tions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Per-step decoding dynamics on HumanEval. Positive values indicate more decoded tokens [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: gives a compact implementation sketch. It follows the default experimental setting: the base posterior proposes token identity, the TILG EMA reference supplies temporal support, the HG stabilizes base acceptance, and extra promotion is lightly constrained by proposal persistence or a confidence escape. class TACGCommitState: def __init__(self): self.z_ref = None # EMA / previous-logit self-reference self.p… 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

58 extracted references · 32 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Program synthesis with large language models, 2021

    Jacob Austin, Augustus Odena, Maxwell Nye, Maarten Bosma, Henryk Michalewski, David Dohan, Ellen Jiang, Carrie Cai, Michael Terry, Quoc Le, and Charles Sutton. Program synthesis with large language models, 2021. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2108.07732

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  2. [2]

    Johnson, Jonathan Ho, Daniel Tarlow, and Rianne van den Berg

    Jacob Austin, Daniel D. Johnson, Jonathan Ho, Daniel Tarlow, and Rianne van den Berg. Structured denoising diffusion models in discrete state-spaces, 2023. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2107.03006

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Llada2.0: Scaling up diffusion language models to 100b, 2025

    Tiwei Bie, Maosong Cao, Kun Chen, Lun Du, Mingliang Gong, Zhuochen Gong, Yanmei Gu, Jiaqi Hu, Zenan Huang, Zhenzhong Lan, Chengxi Li, Chongxuan Li, Jianguo Li, Zehuan Li, Huabin Liu, Lin Liu, Guoshan Lu, Xiaocheng Lu, Yuxin Ma, Jianfeng Tan, Lanning Wei, Ji-Rong Wen, Yipeng Xing, Xiaolu Zhang, Junbo Zhao, Da Zheng, Jun Zhou, Junlin Zhou, Zhanchao Zhou, Li...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Huiwen Chang, Han Zhang, Lu Jiang, Ce Liu, and William T. Freeman. Maskgit: Masked generative image transformer, 2022. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2202.04200

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, Alex Ray, Raul Puri, Gretchen Krueger, Michael Petrov, Heidy Khlaaf, Girish Sastry, Pamela Mishkin, Brooke Chan, Scott Gray, Nick Ryder, Mikhail Pavlov, Alethea Power, Lukasz Kaiser, Mohammad Bavarian...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Sdar-vl: Stable and efficient block-wise diffusion for vision-language understanding, 2025

    Shuang Cheng, Yuhua Jiang, Zineng Zhou, Dawei Liu, Wang Tao, Linfeng Zhang, Biqing Qi, and Bowen Zhou. Sdar-vl: Stable and efficient block-wise diffusion for vision-language understanding, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2512.14068

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Training verifiers to solve math word problems, 2021

    Karl Cobbe, Vineet Kosaraju, Mohammad Bavarian, Mark Chen, Heewoo Jun, Lukasz Kaiser, Matthias Plappert, Jerry Tworek, Jacob Hilton, Reiichiro Nakano, Christopher Hesse, and John Schulman. Training verifiers to solve math word problems, 2021. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2110.14168

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Stable-diffcoder: Pushing the frontier of code diffusion large language model,

    Chenghao Fan, Wen Heng, Bo Li, Sichen Liu, Yuxuan Song, Jing Su, Xiaoye Qu, Kai Shen, and Wei Wei. Stable-diffcoder: Pushing the frontier of code diffusion large language model,

  9. [9]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15892

    arXiv

  10. [10]

    Diffucoder: Understanding and improving masked diffusion models for code generation, 2025

    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, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2506.20639

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Ultrallada: Scaling the context length to 128k for diffusion large language models, 2025

    Guangxin He, Shen Nie, Fengqi Zhu, Yuankang Zhao, Tianyi Bai, Ran Yan, Jie Fu, Chongxuan Li, and Binhang Yuan. Ultrallada: Scaling the context length to 128k for diffusion large language models, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2510.10481

    arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Measuring mathematical problem solving with the math dataset,

    Dan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Saurav Kadavath, Akul Arora, Steven Basart, Eric Tang, Dawn Song, and Jacob Steinhardt. Measuring mathematical problem solving with the math dataset,

  13. [13]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2103.03874

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  14. [14]

    Classifier-free diffusion guidance, 2022

    Jonathan Ho and Tim Salimans. Classifier-free diffusion guidance, 2022. URL https:// arxiv.org/abs/2207.12598

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  15. [15]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models, 2020

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models, 2020. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2006.11239. 10

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    Accelerating diffusion llms via adaptive parallel decoding, 2025

    Daniel Israel, Guy Van den Broeck, and Aditya Grover. Accelerating diffusion llms via adaptive parallel decoding, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2506.00413

    arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Klass: Kl-guided fast inference in masked diffusion models, 2026

    Seo Hyun Kim, Sunwoo Hong, Hojung Jung, Youngrok Park, and Se-Young Yun. Klass: Kl-guided fast inference in masked diffusion models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2511.05664

    arXiv 2026

  18. [18]

    Accelerating diffusion llm inference via local determinism propagation, 2025

    Fanheng Kong, Jingyuan Zhang, Yahui Liu, Zirui Wu, Yu Tian, Victoria W., and Guorui Zhou. Accelerating diffusion llm inference via local determinism propagation, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07081

    arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Lookahead unmasking elicits accurate decoding in diffusion language models, 2025

    Sanghyun Lee, Seungryong Kim, Jongho Park, and Dongmin Park. Lookahead unmasking elicits accurate decoding in diffusion language models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2511.05563

    arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Diffusion language models know the answer before decoding, 2026

    Pengxiang Li, Yefan Zhou, Dilxat Muhtar, Lu Yin, Shilin Yan, Li Shen, Soroush V osoughi, and Shiwei Liu. Diffusion language models know the answer before decoding, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.19982

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    Longllada: Unlocking long context capabilities in diffusion llms, 2025

    Xiaoran Liu, Yuerong Song, Zhigeng Liu, Zengfeng Huang, Qipeng Guo, Ziwei He, and Xipeng Qiu. Longllada: Unlocking long context capabilities in diffusion llms, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.14429

    arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    Mmada-vla: Large diffusion vision-language-action model with unified multi-modal instruction and generation, 2026

    Yang Liu, Pengxiang Ding, Tengyue Jiang, Xudong Wang, Wenxuan Song, Minghui Lin, Han Zhao, Hongyin Zhang, Zifeng Zhuang, Wei Zhao, Siteng Huang, Jinkui Shi, and Donglin Wang. Mmada-vla: Large diffusion vision-language-action model with unified multi-modal instruction and generation, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2603.25406

    arXiv 2026

  23. [23]

    Discrete diffusion modeling by estimating the ratios of the data distribution, 2024

    Aaron Lou, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Discrete diffusion modeling by estimating the ratios of the data distribution, 2024. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2310.16834

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    The flexibility trap: Rethinking the value of arbitrary order in diffusion language models, 2026

    Zanlin Ni, Shenzhi Wang, Yang Yue, Tianyu Yu, Weilin Zhao, Yeguo Hua, Tianyi Chen, Jun Song, Cheng Yu, Bo Zheng, and Gao Huang. The flexibility trap: Rethinking the value of arbitrary order in diffusion language models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601. 15165

    2026

  25. [25]

    Large language diffusion models, 2025

    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, 2025. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2502.09992

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    d-treerpo: Towards more reliable policy optimization for diffusion language models, 2026

    Leyi Pan, Shuchang Tao, Yunpeng Zhai, Zheyu Fu, Liancheng Fang, Minghua He, Lingzhe Zhang, Zhaoyang Liu, Bolin Ding, Aiwei Liu, and Lijie Wen. d-treerpo: Towards more reliable policy optimization for diffusion language models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2512.09675

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis, 2023

    Dustin Podell, Zion English, Kyle Lacey, Andreas Blattmann, Tim Dockhorn, Jonas Müller, Joe Penna, and Robin Rombach. Sdxl: Improving latent diffusion models for high-resolution image synthesis, 2023. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2307.01952

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    d3llm: Ultra-fast diffusion llm using pseudo-trajectory distillation, 2026

    Yu-Yang Qian, Junda Su, Lanxiang Hu, Peiyuan Zhang, Zhijie Deng, Peng Zhao, and Hao Zhang. d3llm: Ultra-fast diffusion llm using pseudo-trajectory distillation, 2026. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2601.07568

    arXiv 2026

  29. [29]

    Improving reasoning for diffusion language models via group diffusion policy optimization, 2026

    Kevin Rojas, Jiahe Lin, Kashif Rasul, Anderson Schneider, Yuriy Nevmyvaka, Molei Tao, and Wei Deng. Improving reasoning for diffusion language models via group diffusion policy optimization, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2510.08554

    arXiv 2026

  30. [30]

    High- resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models, 2022

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Björn Ommer. High- resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2112.10752

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  31. [31]

    Dreambooth: Fine tuning text-to-image diffusion models for subject-driven generation, 2023

    Nataniel Ruiz, Yuanzhen Li, Varun Jampani, Yael Pritch, Michael Rubinstein, and Kfir Aberman. Dreambooth: Fine tuning text-to-image diffusion models for subject-driven generation, 2023. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2208.12242. 11

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    Simple and effective masked diffusion language models, 2024

    Subham Sekhar Sahoo, Marianne Arriola, Yair Schiff, Aaron Gokaslan, Edgar Marroquin, Justin T Chiu, Alexander Rush, and V olodymyr Kuleshov. Simple and effective masked diffusion language models, 2024. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2406.07524

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  33. [33]

    Jiaxin Shi, Kehang Han, Zhe Wang, Arnaud Doucet, and Michalis K. Titsias. Simplified and generalized masked diffusion for discrete data, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2406. 04329

    2025

  34. [34]

    Denoising diffusion implicit models, 2022

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denoising diffusion implicit models, 2022. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2010.02502

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  35. [35]

    wd1: Weighted policy optimization for reasoning in diffusion language models, 2026

    Xiaohang Tang, Rares Dolga, Sangwoong Yoon, and Ilija Bogunovic. wd1: Weighted policy optimization for reasoning in diffusion language models, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2507.08838

    arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    Llada- vla: Vision language diffusion action models, 2025

    Yuqing Wen, Hebei Li, Kefan Gu, Yucheng Zhao, Tiancai Wang, and Xiaoyan Sun. Llada- vla: Vision language diffusion action models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2509. 06932

    2025

  37. [37]

    Fast-dllm: Training-free acceleration of diffusion llm by enabling kv cache and parallel decoding, 2025

    Chengyue Wu, Hao Zhang, Shuchen Xue, Zhijian Liu, Shizhe Diao, Ligeng Zhu, Ping Luo, Song Han, and Enze Xie. Fast-dllm: Training-free acceleration of diffusion llm by enabling kv cache and parallel decoding, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22618

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Streaming- dllm: Accelerating diffusion llms via suffix pruning and dynamic decoding, 2026

    Zhongyu Xiao, Zhiwei Hao, Jianyuan Guo, Yong Luo, Jia Liu, Jie Xu, and Han Hu. Streaming- dllm: Accelerating diffusion llms via suffix pruning and dynamic decoding, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.17917

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  39. [39]

    Xing, and Kun Zhang

    Shaoan Xie, Lingjing Kong, Xiangchen Song, Xinshuai Dong, Guangyi Chen, Eric P. Xing, and Kun Zhang. Advancing reasoning in diffusion language models with denoising process rewards,

  40. [40]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2510.01544

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    Dream-coder 7b: An open diffusion language model for code, 2025

    Zhihui Xie, Jiacheng Ye, Lin Zheng, Jiahui Gao, Jingwei Dong, Zirui Wu, Xueliang Zhao, Shansan Gong, Xin Jiang, Zhenguo Li, and Lingpeng Kong. Dream-coder 7b: An open diffusion language model for code, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2509.01142

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Lopa: Scaling dllm inference via lookahead parallel decoding, 2025

    Chenkai Xu, Yijie Jin, Jiajun Li, Yi Tu, Guoping Long, Dandan Tu, Mingcong Song, Hongjie Si, Tianqi Hou, Junchi Yan, and Zhijie Deng. Lopa: Scaling dllm inference via lookahead parallel decoding, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2512.16229

    arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Mmada: Multimodal large diffusion language models, 2025

    Ling Yang, Ye Tian, Bowen Li, Xinchen Zhang, Ke Shen, Yunhai Tong, and Mengdi Wang. Mmada: Multimodal large diffusion language models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2505.15809

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Dream 7b: Diffusion large language models, 2025

    Jiacheng Ye, Zhihui Xie, Lin Zheng, Jiahui Gao, Zirui Wu, Xin Jiang, Zhenguo Li, and Lingpeng Kong. Dream 7b: Diffusion large language models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2508.15487

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    Dream-vl & dream-vla: Open vision-language and vision-language- action models with diffusion language model backbone, 2026

    Jiacheng Ye, Shansan Gong, Jiahui Gao, Junming Fan, Shuang Wu, Wei Bi, Haoli Bai, Lifeng Shang, and Lingpeng Kong. Dream-vl & dream-vla: Open vision-language and vision-language- action models with diffusion language model backbone, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2512.22615

    arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    Llada-v: Large language diffusion models with visual instruction tuning, 2025

    Zebin You, Shen Nie, Xiaolu Zhang, Jun Hu, Jun Zhou, Zhiwu Lu, Ji-Rong Wen, and Chongxuan Li. Llada-v: Large language diffusion models with visual instruction tuning, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.16933

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Dimple: Discrete diffusion multimodal large language model with parallel decoding, 2025

    Runpeng Yu, Xinyin Ma, and Xinchao Wang. Dimple: Discrete diffusion multimodal large language model with parallel decoding, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.16990

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Diffusionvl: Translating any autoregressive models into diffusion vision language models, 2026

    Lunbin Zeng, Jingfeng Yao, Bencheng Liao, Hongyuan Tao, Wenyu Liu, and Xinggang Wang. Diffusionvl: Translating any autoregressive models into diffusion vision language models, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2512.15713. 12

    arXiv 2026

  49. [49]

    Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models, 2023

    Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala. Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models, 2023. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2302.05543

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    Dllm-searcher: Adapting diffusion large language model for search agents, 2026

    Jiahao Zhao, Shaoxuan Xu, Zhongxiang Sun, Fengqi Zhu, Jingyang Ou, Yuling Shi, Chongxuan Li, Xiao Zhang, and Jun Xu. Dllm-searcher: Adapting diffusion large language model for search agents, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2602.07035

    arXiv 2026

  51. [51]

    d1: Scaling reasoning in diffusion large language models via reinforcement learning, 2025

    Siyan Zhao, Devaansh Gupta, Qinqing Zheng, and Aditya Grover. d1: Scaling reasoning in diffusion large language models via reinforcement learning, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/ abs/2504.12216

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Dllm agent: See farther, run faster,

    Huiling Zhen, Weizhe Lin, Renxi Liu, Kai Han, Yiming Li, Yuchuan Tian, Hanting Chen, Xiaoguang Li, Xiaosong Li, Chen Chen, Xianzhi Yu, Mingxuan Yuan, Youliang Yan, Peifeng Qin, Jun Wang, Yu Wang, Dacheng Tao, and Yunhe Wang. Dllm agent: See farther, run faster,

  53. [53]

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2602.07451

    arXiv

  54. [54]

    Masked diffusion models are secretly time-agnostic masked models and exploit inaccurate categorical sampling, 2025

    Kaiwen Zheng, Yongxin Chen, Hanzi Mao, Ming-Yu Liu, Jun Zhu, and Qinsheng Zhang. Masked diffusion models are secretly time-agnostic masked models and exploit inaccurate categorical sampling, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2409.02908

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Mosaic: Unlocking long-context inference for diffusion llms via global memory planning and dynamic peak taming, 2026

    Liang Zheng, Bowen Shi, Yitao Hu, Jiawei Zhang, Ruofan Li, Sheng Chen, Wenxin Li, and Keqiu Li. Mosaic: Unlocking long-context inference for diffusion llms via global memory planning and dynamic peak taming, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2601.06562

    arXiv 2026

  56. [56]

    Attention-based sampler for diffusion language models, 2026

    Yuyan Zhou, Kai Syun Hou, Weiyu Chen, and James Kwok. Attention-based sampler for diffusion language models, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2604.08564

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  57. [57]

    Llada 1.5: Variance-reduced preference optimization for large language diffusion models, 2025

    Fengqi Zhu, Rongzhen Wang, Shen Nie, Xiaolu Zhang, Chunwei Wu, Jun Hu, Jun Zhou, Jianfei Chen, Yankai Lin, Ji-Rong Wen, and Chongxuan Li. Llada 1.5: Variance-reduced preference optimization for large language diffusion models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2505.19223

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    confidence

    Fengqi Zhu, Zebin You, Yipeng Xing, Zenan Huang, Lin Liu, Yihong Zhuang, Guoshan Lu, Kangyu Wang, Xudong Wang, Lanning Wei, Hongrui Guo, Jiaqi Hu, Wentao Ye, Tieyuan Chen, Chenchen Li, Chengfu Tang, Haibo Feng, Jun Hu, Jun Zhou, Xiaolu Zhang, Zhenzhong Lan, Junbo Zhao, Da Zheng, Chongxuan Li, Jianguo Li, and Ji-Rong Wen. Llada-moe: A sparse moe diffusion ...

    arXiv 2025