Fast-dVLA: Accelerating Discrete Diffusion VLA to Real-Time Performance
Authors: Wenxuan Song, Jiayi Chen, Shuai Chen, Jingbo Wang, Pengxiang Ding, Han Zhao, Yikai Qin, Xinhu Zheng, +3 more
Organizations: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou) · ShanghaiTech University · Shanghai Institute of Technical Physics, CAS · Westlake University · Zhejiang University · AIR, Tsinghua University
This paper proposes a novel approach to address the challenge that pretrained VLA models often fail to effectively improve performance and reduce adaptation costs during standard supervised finetuning (SFT). Some advanced finetuning methods with auxiliary training objectives can improve performance and reduce the number of convergence steps. However, they typically incur significant computational overhead due to the additional losses from auxiliary tasks. To simultaneously achieve the enhanced capabilities of auxiliary training with the simplicity of standard SFT, we decouple the two objectives of auxiliary task training within the parameter space, namely, enhancing general capabilities and fitting task-specific action distributions. To deliver this goal, we only need to train the model to converge on a small-scale task set using two distinct training strategies. The difference between the resulting model parameters can then be interpreted as capability vectors provided by auxiliary tasks. These vectors are then merged with pretrained parameters to form a capability-enhanced meta model. Moreover, when standard SFT is augmented with a lightweight orthogonal regularization loss, the merged model attains performance comparable to auxiliary finetuned baselines with reduced computational overhead. Experimental results demonstrate that this approach is highly effective across diverse robot tasks. Project page: https://chris1220313648.github.io/Fast-dVLA/
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Speed/Success Rate trade-off. Left (Intra-comparison): Compared to other acceleration strategies for discrete diffusion VLAs (dVLAs), DD-VLA ( Liang et al., 2025b ) and Dream-VLA ( Ye et al., 2025a ) , our Fast-dVLA achieves a favorable success rate and speed. Here, BlockDiff denotes block diffusion ( Arriola et al., 2025 ) . Right (Inter-comparison): Our Fast-dVLA surpasses autoregressive methods, i.e. , π0 -FAST ( Pertsch et al., 2025 ) . It also reaches parallel performance and inference frequency with state-of-the-art (SOTA) continuous flow-matching methods, i.e. , π0.5 ( Intelligence et al., 2025 ) , while maintaining several inherent advantages of dVLAs. We report metrics on LIBERO ( Liu et al., 2023 ) .
Figure 2: Comparison among discrete decoding paradigms. Here, Forward per Sequence denotes the needed forward numbers for a full sequence output, Forward Speed denotes the decoding speed for each forward, and Speed per Sequence (i.e., Inference Speed) denotes the decoding speed for the full sequence output. Our Fast-dVLA requires significantly fewer forward passes and executes each pass efficiently, resulting in substantially faster inference.
Figure 3: Visualization of the decoding tendency of action tokens at different positions in Dream-VLA ( Ye et al., 2025a ) . Brighter regions indicate higher decoding probability. Despite using bidirectional attention, the model exhibits a clear left-to-right decoding tendency such that action tokens at earlier temporal positions are typically decoded in earlier diffusion iterations. Overall, the decoding process reveals an implicit block-wise AR pattern.
Figure 4: KV cache similarity across diffusion iterations under block-diffusion decoding. We visualize the similarity of attention key–value (KV) states for the first action block across different denoising steps. (a): In native dVLA with bidirectional attention, the KV representations evolve across iterations, preventing effective reuse of cached states. (b): In contrast, after adapting dVLA to a block-wise attention architecture via asymmetric distillation, once all tokens in the first block are unmasked, the corresponding KV states remain fixed, enabling efficient KV cache reuse and substantially reducing the computational overhead in subsequent iterations.
Figure 5: Block-wise Attention.
Figure 6: Overview of the pipelined parallel decoding in Fast-dVLA . Blocks are processed concurrently in a dynamically growing pipeline. A new block is introduced when the tail block exceeds the addition threshold τadd=72 , and becomes fully activated after its predecessor surpasses the activation threshold τact=74 .
Decoding Method
Success Rate ↑
Speed ↑
Spatial
Goal
Object
Long
Avg.
(Tokens/s)
Dream-VLA ( Ye et al., 2025a )
0.902
0.920
0.880
0.720
0.856
98.8 ( ×1.0 )
+ Fast-dLLM
0.884
0.894
0.834
0.702
0.828
183.2 ( ×1.9 )
+ Block Diffusion
0.918
0.904
0.886
0.722
0.858
181.7 ( ×1.8 )
+ Fast-dVLA (ours)
0.912
0.920
0.902
0.746
0.870
313.1 ( ×3.2 )
Discrete Diffusion VLA ( Liang et al., 2025b )
0.972
0.986
0.974
0.920
0.963
152.1 ( ×1.5 )
Table 1: Comparison between various acceleration strategies on two base models in terms of task-wise success rates (SR) and inference speed on LIBERO.
Decoding Method
Task
Tasks Completed in a Row ↑
Avg.
Speed ↑
1/5
2/5
3/5
4/5
5/5
Len. ↑
(Tokens/s)
UD-VLA
ABCD → D
0.992
0.968
0.936
0.904
0.840
4.64
67.3 ( ×1.0 )
+ Fast-dLLM
ABCD → D
0.972
0.920
0.858
0.808
0.762
4.32
132.5 ( ×2.0 )
+ Block Diffusion
ABCD → D
0.988
0.944
0.894
0.862
0.804
4.50
129.5 ( ×1.9 )
+ Fast-dVLA (ours)
ABCD → D
0.984
0.952
0.922
0.870
0.812
4.54
186.7 ( ×2.8 )
Table 2: Comparison between various acceleration strategies on UD-VLA in terms of tasks completed in a row, average sentence length, and inference speed on CALVIN.
Method
Task
Tasks Completed in a Row
Avg. Len. ↑
1/5
2/5
3/5
4/5
5/5
RT-1 ( Brohan et al., 2023 )
ABCD → D
0.844
0.617
0.438
0.323
0.227
2.45
LLaDA-VLA ( Wen et al., 2025c )
ABCD → D
0.956
0.878
0.795
0.739
0.645
4.01
Deer ( Yue et al., 2024b )
ABCD → D
0.982
0.902
0.821
0.759
0.670
4.13
GR-1 ( Wu et al., 2024 )
ABCD → D
0.949
0.896
0.844
0.789
0.731
4.21
ReconVLA ( Song et al., 2025c )
ABCD → D
0.980
0.900
0.845
0.785
0.705
4.23
Table 3: Comprehensive evaluation of long-horizon manipulation on the CALVIN benchmark. UniVLA ∗ denotes the variant without historical frames for fair comparison.
Method
Spoon on Towel
Carrot on Plate
Stack Green Block
Eggplant in Basket
Average
Grasp
Success
Grasp
Success
Grasp
Success
Grasp
Success
Success
Speed
RoboVLM ( Liu et al., 2025a )
37.5
20.8
33.3
25.0
8.3
8.3
0.0
0.0
13.5
-
SpatialVLA ( Qu et al., 2025 )
20.8
16.7
29.2
25.0
62.5
29.2
100.0
100.0
42.7
-
OpenVLA-OFT ( Kim et al., 2025a )
50.0
12.5
41.7
4.2
70.8
20.8
91.7
37.5
18.8
-
π0 ( Black et al., 2024 )
45.8
29.1
25.0
0.0
50.0
16.6
91.6
62.5
27.1
-
π0 -FAST ( Pertsch et al., 2025 )
62.5
29.1
58.5
21.9
54.0
10.8
83.3
66.6
32.1
107.5
Table 4: Evaluation on WidowX Robot tasks in SimplerEnv. We report the Grasping Success Rate (Grasp) and Task Success Rate (Success) in percentages (%). Besides, we further report the decode speed (Speed) of all VLAs with discrete output, which is calculated in tokens per second.
Figure 7: Real-world experiment results. We report (a) successful grasps per minute ( ↑ ); (b) success rates ( ↑ ) and completion times ( ↓ ); (c) execution frequency ( ↑ ).
Figure 8: Action Mean Squared Error (MSE) of the dVLA at varying training steps on LIBERO. The MSE of our asymmetric distillation exhibits the fastest decline, indicating the most rapid convergence speed.
Figure 9: Ablation study on the confidence threshold τconf of Fast-dVLA based on UD-VLA.
Block
Success Rate
Speedup
Multiples
74.7%
4.01 ×
Ramdom
73.3%
3.95 ×
Table 5: Choice of block size on LIBERO-Long based on Dream-VLA. Here, multiples denotes that the value is the multiples of the dimensionality of action, while random denotes random numbers for the block size.
τadd
τact
avg. len. ↑
Speed ↑
0.4
0.4
4.42
253.1
0.4
0.6
4.46
248.3
0.5
0.5
4.44
204.8
0.5
0.7
4.54
186.7
0.6
0.6
4.52
182.3
0.6
0.8
4.57
160.7
Table S1: Ablation study on block expansion threshold τadd and block activation threshold τact on UD-VLA.
Radical Decoding
Speed (Tokens/s)
Avg. Len.
log2
186.67
4.54
log3
164.42
4.57
log4
144.71
4.58
Table S2: Comparison with various base models in terms of inference speed, average length, and execution frequency.
Method
Spatial
Object
Goal
Long
Average
Octo ( Octo Team et al., 2024 )
78.9%
85.7%
84.6%
51.1%
75.1%
SpatialVLA ( Qu et al., 2025 )
88.2%
89.9%
78.6%
55.5%
78.1%
CoT-VLA ( Zhao et al., 2025 )
87.5%
91.6%
87.6%
69.0%
81.1%
WorldVLA ( Cen et al., 2025 )
87.6%
96.2%
83.4%
60.0%
81.8%
ThinkAct ( Huang et al., 2025 )
88.3%
91.4%
87.1%
70.9%
84.4%
π0 -FAST ( Pertsch et al., 2025 )
96.4%
96.8%
88.6%
60.2%
85.5%
Table S3 : Evaluation and comparison on the LIBERO benchmark.