cs.LGMay 22, 2026

TUBE: Tangent Upper Bound on Evidence for Discrete Diffusion Language Models

Authors: Arseny IvanovSergei KholkinVladislav GromadskiiGrigoriy KsenofontovIvan OseledetsAlexander Korotin

Organizations: AXXX, Russia · Applied AI Institute, Moscow, Russia · MIRAI, Russia

Abstract

Log-likelihood is a standard metric for evaluating generative models. Unfortunately, in contrast to autoregressive models (ARMs), discrete diffusion models generally do not admit exact computation of this quantity. Existing evaluations, therefore, rely on the evidence lower bound (ELBO), leaving unclear how much higher the true value may be. We address this by introducing the Tangent Upper Bound on Evidence (TUBE), a variational upper bound on log-likelihood that admits an unbiased Monte Carlo estimator. Our TUBE extends across latent-variable models, including masked diffusion models (MDMs), any-order ARMs (AO-ARMs), and block variants of both. Applied to block MDMs and block AO-ARMs, TUBE reveals our key empirical finding that these models lie strictly below the exact ARM baseline, showing that ARMs still dominate in likelihood.

Explore similar work

May 18, 2026cs.CL

Continuous Diffusion Scales Competitively with Discrete Diffusion for Language

While diffusion has drawn considerable recent attention from the language modeling community, continuous diffusion has appeared less scalable than discrete approaches. To challenge this belief we revisit Plaid, a likelihood-based continuous diffusion language model (DLM), and construct RePlaid by aligning the architecture of Plaid with modern discrete DLMs. In this unified setting, we establish the first scaling law for continuous DLMs that rivals discrete DLMs: RePlaid exhibits a compute gap of only 20×20\times compared to autoregressive models, outperforms Duo while using fewer parameters, and outperforms MDLM in the over-trained regime. We benchmark RePlaid against recent continuous DLMs: on OpenWebText, RePlaid achieves a new state-of-the-art PPL bound of 22.122.1 among continuous DLMs and superior generation quality. These results suggest that continuous diffusion, when trained via likelihood, is a highly competitive and scalable alternative to discrete DLMs. Moreover, we offer theoretical insights to understand the advantage of likelihood-based training. We show that optimizing the noise schedule to minimize the ELBO's variance naturally yields linear cross-entropy (information loss) over time. This evenly distributes denoising difficulty without any case-specific time reparameterization. In addition, we find that optimizing embeddings via likelihood creates structured geometries and drives the most significant likelihood gain.
Zhihan Yang, Wei Guo, Shuibai Zhang +5
Jul 6, 2026cs.LG

What Does a Discrete Diffusion Model Learn?

What does a discrete diffusion model learn: a denoiser, a score ratio, or a bridge plug-in predictor? At the level of jump rates, these are one object in different coordinates, and reading a neural network in the wrong coordinate changes the process being trained and sampled. Starting with a rigorous derivation of the continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC) ELBO for any noising process, boundary terms included, we prove the \emph{Oracle Distance} theorem: the negative ELBO is exactly equal to the data entropy plus the path KL from the oracle reverse process to the learned one, not merely a bound. Its unique optimizer is therefore the conditional expectation of the true reverse jump rate given the current noisy state, and its irreducible cost is the rate at which the forward process ZtZ_t destroys information about the clean data Z0Z_0, ddtI(Z0;Zt)-\tfrac{d}{dt}I(Z_0; Z_t), so every noising process shares the same best achievable negative ELBO: the data entropy. For sequences with token-factorizing noise, the oracle projection yields three exact coordinates for the optimizer: denoiser, cavity (bridge plug-in), and score, with closed-form conversions among them. This framework identifies which law each loss in the literature actually optimizes, recovering MDM, UDM, SEDD, and GIDD as special cases; explains why denoiser and cavity coincide for masked diffusion but not for uniform diffusion; proves that a denoiser parameterization makes the uniform ELBO diverge at initialization while the bridge plug-in stays finite; and calibrates ELBO implementations exactly at initialization. Every identity is verified numerically, without approximation, on an exactly solvable model.
Rodrigo Casado Noguerales, Bernhard Schölkopf, Thomas Hofmann +1
May 22, 2026cs.LG

DiLaDiff: Distilled Latent-Augmented Diffusion for Language Modeling

Diffusion language models intrinsically fail to capture correlations between decoded tokens, which leads to a harsh trade-off between sampling quality and throughput. To solve this issue, we propose DiLaDiff, a variant of masked diffusion language models with three components: (1) a continuous latent space with semantic capabilities, learned by an auto-encoder fine-tuned from an existing masked diffusion language model; (2) a latent diffusion model learning the prior over the encoder distribution; (3) a consistency model distilling the learned prior into a few-step latent generative model. We show that, even without distillation, our latent-guided diffusion model outperforms the masked diffusion baseline while significantly accelerating inference. Consistency distillation further lowers the computational overhead of continuous diffusion, such that the latent is generated in negligible time compared to discrete decoding.
Jean-Marie Lemercier, Tomas Geffner, Karsten Kreis +3