Block-sparse attention accelerates video transformers by grouping queries and keys and computing attention only between selected groups. However, it faces two challenges: (1) queries sharing a block route may attend to different keys; and (2) retaining most attention mass does not necessarily preserve the attention output. We find that partition choice affects both the overlap among grouped queries' preferred supports and how well an affine function of the sparse output can represent the difference between dense and sparse outputs. We introduce SparsePR, a training-free method combining Response-Coupled Partitioning with Probe-Fitted Residual Reconstruction. We first group paired key/value tokens by how their keys respond to sampled queries. We then group queries by their responses to the resulting key-group centroids for shared sparse routing. We compute exact attention on a small set of query rows and fit an affine correction to the differences between their dense and sparse outputs using weighted ridge regression. The fitted map predicts a residual for each unprobed query, which we add to its sparse output. We measure attention-output error as the relative L2 error with respect to each query's dense output. Across four video generation and world models, SparsePR reduces this error, averaged over unprobed queries, by 61.6--90.5% compared with semantic block-sparse attention without residual correction, at 22% executed-pair density including exact probes. SparsePR achieves 1.48x--2.61x end-to-end speedups over dense attention, with dense-reference PSNR of 24.42--31.84 dB at 21.9--26.0% realized executed-pair density. Project page: https://pardistaghavi.github.io/SparsePR-website/
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Qualitative results for the Cosmos-Predict2.5-14B model.
Figure 2: Overview of SparsePR. Response-Coupled Partitioning builds executable K/V and query groups, and Probe-Fitted Residual Reconstruction uses exact probe rows to correct the sparse output.
Figure 3: Structural observations under the semantic reference partition. (a) Pooling eight queries expands the support required to retain 90% attention mass. Markers denote model medians. (b) Nearly identical retained mass can yield substantially different output errors.
Dense-Reference Fidelity
VBench / VBench++
PBench
Efficiency
Model
Method
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
ImgQual ↑
SubCons ↑
Quality ↑
Density ↓
PFLOPs ↓
E2E Speedup ↑
Content-generation video models
HunyuanVideo 13B, 720p Text-to-Video
Dense
–
–
–
0.850
0.976
–
100.0%
612.38
1.00 ×
SpargeAttn Zhang et al. (2025a)
25.31
0.832
0.217
0.763
0.928
–
40.19%
389.76
1.38 ×
SVG2 Yang et al. (2026)
29.87
0.907
0.121
0.850
0.927
–
25.45%
299.02
2.30 ×
SVOO Luo et al. (2026)
24.87
0.843
0.224
0.679
0.976
–
33.26%
345.81
2.17 ×
Table 1: Quality–efficiency comparison across content-generation and physical video world models.
Configuration
HunyuanVideo
Wan2.2
Cosmos- Predict2.5
Cosmos3-Nano
Partition construction, repair disabled
Semantic partition
0.089 / 0.714
0.164 / 1.734
0.791 / 7.532
0.359 / 3.356
Key-response K/V partition
0.085 / 0.812
0.156 / 1.659
0.769 / 7.270
0.341 / 3.174
Response-coupled partition
0.073 / 0.696
0.108 / 0.647
0.761 / 7.227
0.331 / 3.150
Partition–repair interaction
Semantic partition + probe repair
0.053 / 0.356
0.105 / 0.819
0.262 / 0.826
0.124 / 0.668
Table 2: Partition and reconstruction ablations at 22% executed-pair density, including exact probes. Entries report mean/p99 normalized attention output error on unprobed rows. Lower is better. Repair comparisons fix probe indices and estimator settings. The key-response K/V variant changes only K/V grouping, retaining semantic query groups.
Configuration
HunyuanVideo
Wan2.2
Cosmos- Predict2.5
Cosmos3-Nano
Probe selection: full weighted ridge fixed
Random probes
0.039 / 0.235
0.080 / 0.356
0.075 / 0.503
0.083 / 0.467
Uniform spatiotemporal probes
0.037 / 0.246
0.089 / 0.394
0.090 / 0.543
0.096 / 0.549
Query group stratified probes
0.030 / 0.207
0.063 / 0.323
0.075 / 0.489
0.076 / 0.447
Correction family: query group stratified probes fixed
Mean-only
0.043 / 0.362
0.089 / 0.455
0.350 / 3.538
0.191 / 1.376
Table 4: Probe-selection and correction-family ablations with response-coupled partitioning, M=64 , λ=1 . Within each panel, only the indicated component varies. Entries report mean/p99 normalized attention-output error on a shared set of unprobed query rows. Lower is better. Bold row labels mark the reference configuration, repeated in both panels.
Figure 4: Partitioning and runtime analysis. (a) Error reduction from response-coupled vs. semantic partitioning at 22% density. (b) Wan2.2 full generation latency for Dense, SVG2, and SparsePR.
Appendix figures & tables10 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Parameter
Value
Requested query clusters Cq
300
Requested K/V clusters Ck
1000
Metric query sampling budget per query head
2048
Initial / subsequent k means iteration limits
25/2
k means convergence tolerance
10−4
Key response rank rK
48
Appendix
Table C.1: Method configuration used in the evaluated models.
Model
Nq
M/Nq
HunyuanVideo
118,800
0.054%
Wan2.2
75,600
0.085%
Cosmos-Predict2.5
84,480
0.076%
Cosmos3-Nano
44,160
0.145%
Appendix
Table C.2: Probe fractions for the evaluated sequence lengths with M=64 .
Figure D.1: Matched retained mass across models. Dark points are heads from the same input, layer, and generation step as Cases A and B. Stars mark two heads with nearly identical retained mass. The logarithmic y axis shows multiplicative differences in p99 normalized output error.
Model
Per query RMS
Global RMS
Per query RMS + log magnitude
HunyuanVideo
0.073
0.074
0.083
Wan2.2
0.108
0.109
0.166
Cosmos-Predict2.5
0.761
0.762
0.777
Cosmos3-Nano
0.331
0.332
0.337
Appendix
Table D.1: Query RMS normalization ablation. Mean normalized attention output error ∥Oisp−Oidense∥2/(∥Oidense∥2+10−8) . Lower is better. Bold entries mark the lowest error in each row.
(a) Probe count with fixed λ=1 and no output truncation
Model
M=16
M=32
M=64
M=128
HunyuanVideo
0.037
0.034
0.030
0.027
Wan2.2
0.080
0.071
0.063
0.057
Cosmos-Predict2.5
0.118
0.092
0.075
0.065
Cosmos3-Nano
0.097
0.082
0.076
0.074
Appendix
Table D.2: Sensitivity to probe count and estimator settings. Entries report mean normalized attention output error on the same unprobed query rows across settings. Lower is better. Each panel varies one parameter while holding the others fixed.
Figure D.2: Oracle affine residual representability under response coupled versus semantic partitioning. The left panel shows the increase in the fraction of residual squared norm explained by the best affine fit. The right panel shows the reduction in squared error remaining after fitting. We fit all 2048 evaluated queries per head and sum energies across cases before computing ratios. Cosmos-Predict2.5 uses the subset matched by density.
Figure E.1: Dense and SparsePR outputs for Cosmos3-Nano-16B on VBench++.
Figure E.2: Dense and SparsePR outputs for Cosmos3-Nano-16B on PBench.
Figure E.3: Qualitative comparison on HunyuanVideo-13B.
Figure E.4: Qualitative comparison on Wan2.2-I2V-A14B.
Diffusion transformers are essential for high-fidelity video generation, but long token sequences make attention a dominant inference bottleneck. Training-free dynamic sparse attention alleviates this bottleneck by computing only selected key-value blocks, yet existing methods struggle to sparsify attention both efficiently and accurately for two reasons: (1) Rigid, unpredictable, and costly routing: selecting a fixed fraction of top-ranked blocks by proxy score imposes fixed budgets, whereas retaining blocks to reach a target cumulative proxy probability mass yields dynamic but potentially imbalanced budgets; both incur non-negligible overhead from computing and materializing proxy scores. (2) Lossy keep-or-drop sparsification: unselected blocks are discarded entirely, degrading accuracy under aggressive sparsity. These limitations motivate cheaper dynamic-budget routing while limiting accuracy degradation. In this paper, we introduce training-free Sol-Attn (Sparsifying online attention), which unifies dynamic routing, sparse computation, and approximation correction in a single online-softmax pass, achieving a better accuracy-efficiency trade-off in sparse attention. The core of Sol-Attn is on-the-fly block thresholding with proxy-score reuse, which selects critical blocks by comparing block proxy scores against a threshold during online softmax. This design enables dynamic yet controllable block budgets without materializing the proxy map, while directly reusing the proxy scores of unselected blocks to approximate their contribution. Experiments across image and video generation tasks show that Sol-Attn advances the quality-efficiency frontier of training-free sparse attention, delivering 2.1 times and 2.3 times end-to-end speedups for video generation and editing, respectively, while preserving visual quality.
Diffusion transformers have achieved remarkable success in high-quality video generation, yet their reliance on spatiotemporal 3D full attention incurs prohibitive computational cost due to the quadratic complexity of attention. Block sparse attention is a common approach to mitigate this by focusing computation on important regions. However, attention maps in DiTs exhibit inherently dynamic and fine-grained sparsity, which causes existing block sparse attention methods to degrade significantly in quality, especially at high sparsity ratios. In this paper, we revisit block sparse attention and derive a theoretical lower bound on attention recall to characterize the key factors governing its effectiveness. Guided by these insights, we propose DFSAttn, a training-free sparse attention framework that enables dynamic, fine-grained sparsification efficiently. DFSAttn incorporates three core designs: Hilbert curve-based token reordering to achieve fine-grained sparsity while preserving efficient GPU execution, hierarchical block scoring for accurate block importance estimation, and sparse mask caching with adaptive ratios to balance accuracy and efficiency. Experimental results demonstrate that DFSAttn consistently outperforms prior methods under high sparsity, achieving up to 2.1× end-to-end speedup while maintaining high generation quality. Our code is open-sourced and available at https://github.com/jessica-hujie/DFSAttn.
Diffusion Transformers (DiTs) achieve strong video generation quality but suffer from high inference cost due to dense 3D attention, motivating sparse attention techniques for improving efficiency. However, existing training-free sparse attention methods for video generation still face two unresolved limitations: ignoring layer heterogeneity in attention pruning and ignoring query-key coupling in block partitioning, which hinder a better quality-speedup trade-off. In this work, we uncover a critical insight: attention sparsity is an intrinsic layer-wise property, with only minor variation across different inputs. Motivated by this observation, we propose SVOO, a training-free sparse attention framework for fast video generation via offline layer-wise sparsity profiling and online bidirectional co-clustering. Specifically, SVOO adopts a two-stage paradigm: (i) offline layer-wise sensitivity profiling to derive intrinsic per-layer pruning levels, and (ii) online block-wise sparse attention via a bidirectional co-clustering algorithm. Extensive experiments on seven widely used video generation models demonstrate that SVOO achieves a superior quality-speedup trade-off over state-of-the-art methods, delivering up to 1.93x speedup while maintaining a PSNR of up to 29 dB on Wan2.1. Code is available at: https://github.com/Mutual-Luo/SVOO.
Jiayi Luo, Jiayu Chen, Jiankun Wang +6
SKLCCSE, School of Computer Science and Engineering, Beihang University · Zhongguancun Academy · School of Computer Science, Peking University +4