Copy-as-Decode: Grammar-Constrained Parallel Prefill for LLM Editing

Ziyang Liu

cs.CLApr 20, 2026

Copy-as-Decode: Grammar-Constrained Parallel Prefill for LLM Editing

Authors: Ziyang Liu

Organizations: Independent Researcher

Abstract

LLMs edit text and code by autoregressively regenerating the full output, even when most tokens appear verbatim in the input. We study Copy-as-Decode, a decoding-layer mechanism that recasts edit generation as structured decoding over a two-primitive grammar: <copy lines="i-j"/> references an input line range, <gen>...</gen> emits new content. A token-level FSM guarantees syntactic validity, and a serving-layer primitive updates the KV cache for each copy span via a single parallel-prefill forward rather than $N$ autoregressive steps -- sharing the parallel-forward kernel of speculative decoding but with input tokens as the draft and program-enforced acceptance replacing probabilistic verification. We report an upper-bound analysis that requires no end-to-end training. (i) Kernel speedup: on Qwen2.5-{1.5B, 7B}, copying $N$ tokens via parallel prefill is $6.8\times$ -- $303\times$ faster than autoregressive ( $N \in [8, 512]$ , A100 80GB bf16). (ii) Copy ceiling: on ProbeEdit and HumanEvalPack-Fix (Py/JS), $74$ -- $98\%$ of gold tokens are reachable under the line-level primitive; composed with the empirical kernel over each corpus's span histogram this yields a closed-form wall-clock bound of $29.0\times / 3.4\times / 4.2\times$ ( $13.0\times$ pooled). A token-level extension reaches $91$ -- $99\%$ coverage with $4.5\times$ -- $6.5\times$ floors. (iii) Pipeline losslessness: oracle programs round-trip through the deterministic resolver on all $482$ cases, localizing any downstream failure to span selection rather than the mechanism. A perturbation study shows pooled EM drops from $100\%$ to $15.48\%$ under off-by-one noise. A fine-tuning pilot on Qwen2.5-Coder-1.5B lifts HEvalFix-Py EM from $0/33$ (untrained) to $12$ -- $17\%$ , a learnability signal, not a production selector. Batched-serving integration and multi-file coverage are scoped as follow-up.

Explore similar work

Sep 3, 2026cs.CL

CROCODIL: Cross-Model Code Editing with LLMs

Large language models (LLMs) have become ubiquitous tools for code generation and editing. However, development teams often use multiple LLM assistants. Different developers may prefer different models, and individual developers may switch between models across different coding sessions. Because of this, the edits any one model makes are frequently applied to foreign code originally generated by another model. These LLMs are often trained on different datasets, and as a result have different stylistic preferences. Do LLMs behave differently when they edit foreign code originally written by a different LLM with a different coding style? We find that models tend to make more, and often excessive, edits on foreign code. We introduce CROCODIL (Cross-model Code Editing with LLMs), a post-training framework for reducing excessive edits while preserving functional correctness. CROCODIL's similarity reward penalizes large changes, while its execution reward scores build and test success. We use the product of these two rewards to encourage the policy to decrease the edit size without decreasing the edit task success rate. CROCODIL is available at https://github.com/EngineeringSoftware/Crocodil.

Linghan Zhong, Aditya Thimmaiah, Jayanth Srinivasa +2

Large Language

Ask PDF

Jul 27, 2026cs.SE

Learning from 53.6K Real-World Developer Edits of AI-Generated Code

Imperfections in AI-generated code require that software developers modify the generated code manually, or by re-prompting an AI programming assistant. Manual code edits provide more realistic and granular information on editing behavior than Git commits, which only contain final successful code snippets. Yet, due to a lack of high-quality, realistic code editing data, LLMs are mostly trained on publicly available Git data (e.g., commits). To address this gap, we introduce DECODE (Developer Edits of Code Dataset), a dataset of 53.6K real-world in-IDE code edits of AI-generated code in Python, TypeScript, and JavaScript, sourced from 1K+ developers. First, we demonstrate the utility of DECODE for data analysis, obtaining insights on when, why, and how AI-generated code is edited. We find that most edits occur within the first 15 minutes after accepting an AI completion, resulting in the removal of AI completions in 31% of edit trajectories. Second, we use DECODE to benchmark the ability of LLMs to predict code edits. We find that finetuning on DECODE enables open-source 3B models to perform code edit prediction tasks significantly better than frontier LLMs. We then discuss implications of this work, emphasizing the necessity of developer-centric machine learning approaches for future AI programming assistants.

Jenny T. Liang, Mihika Bairathi, Wayne Chi +3

Code Generation Code Completion

Ask PDF

Sep 17, 2026cs.CL

To Copy or Not to Copy: Controlling Speculative Decoding via Intrinsic Model Signals

Speculative Decoding (SD) has significantly accelerated Large Language Model (LLM) inference, yet existing approaches face a fundamental tradeoff between two drafting strategies: neural drafting and context-based copying. Neural drafts (e.g., EAGLE3) provide robust performance across diverse text settings, while copy-based methods achieve higher speedups in copy-intensive regimes by generating candidates faster and exploiting long repetition spans for near-perfect speculation. We analyze existing copy-based methods and find that they are prone to accidental repetitions where surface-level n-gram overlap does not reflect a structural intent to copy, leading to false-positive triggers that ultimately degrade throughput. We introduce SwitchSD, an adaptive framework that treats copying as a latent control signal of the LLM. By training lightweight probes on the target model's internal representations, SwitchSD identifies genuine copy-intent with high precision (AUC > 0.99). This allows the system to dynamically switch between neural drafting (e.g., EAGLE) and context-based copying. Our results across Llama and Qwen families demonstrate throughput gains of up to 15% over state-of-the-art baselines like EAGLE3, effectively turning copying from a noisy heuristic into a principled, model-aware decoding regime.

Roy Eisenstadt, Ido Cohen, Edo Cohen-Karlik +2

Speculative Decoding LLM Inference Efficiency Repetition

Ask PDF