Diffusion language models can generate many tokens in parallel, but they still require repeated denoising steps during inference. This makes generation costly, especially when the model continues to recompute tokens that are already stable. To address these limitations, we propose CAI-DLLM, a training-free inference method that uses first-step confidence to guide denoising and reduce inference time. Specifically, CAI-DLLM commits easy tokens earlier, allocates more denoising steps to harder tokens, and adjusts decoding schedules across output blocks. As it relies only on first-step confidence signals, it does not require retraining, extra predictors, or weight updates. We evaluate CAI-DLLM on LLaDA-8B-Instruct and Dream-7B-Instruct across math, code, reasoning, commonsense, and long-context tasks. CAI-DLLM achieves up to 18.2x wall clock inference speedup on LLaDA GSM8K while improving accuracy from 76.27% to 77.41%, and up to 13.1x speedup on Dream HumanEval while achieving higher pass@1 than no-cache inference, 48.17% compared with 46.95%. On harder reasoning tasks, speedups reach 44.8x, with a largest accuracy drop of 4.4 points, while energy consumption is reduced by up to 95.3%.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Denoising work is uneven across layers, blocks, and tokens. (a) Hidden state drift varies across transformer layers. (b) Saved steps increase in later blocks as earlier context becomes available. (c) First-step confidence separates easy tokens with ci(0)>0.50 , medium tokens with 0.25≤ci(0)≤0.50 , and hard tokens with ci(0)<0.25 .
Figure 2: Overview of CAI-dLLM . ① The method runs a step-zero forward pass to obtain token confidence scores. ② These scores drive a confidence-aware controller that guides adaptive parallel decoding, block-adaptive scheduling, and token-level step budgets. ③ During iterative denoising, easy tokens are committed early while hard tokens receive more steps. ④ A grinding-phase detector stops low-yield late denoising. The method is training-free and does not change model weights.
Figure 3: Accuracy and speedup comparison across the seven main benchmarks for Dream-7B and LLaDA-8B. LongBench is reported in detail in Appendix D.2 .
Bench.
Method
TPS
Spd.
Score
Eng.
GSM8K
No Cache
19.8
1.0×
79.68
3052
DualCache
103.2
9.3×
78.47
291
ES-dLLM
97.9
9.0×
77.48
219
CAI-dLLM
369.5
18.7×
77.26±1.18
146
Human Eval
No Cache
44.3
1.0×
46.95
374
DualCache
258.1
5.8×
45.12
60
Table 1: Results on Dream-7B-Instruct. TPS = tokens/sec; Eng. = energy in Wh. Bold = best. DualCache from 29 . CAI-dLLM scores show std. err. as ± .
Bench.
Method
TPS
Spd.
Score
Eng.
GSM8K
No Cache
17.1
1.0×
76.27
3559
DualCache
196.4
11.7×
77.18
264
ES-dLLM
175.3
10.6×
77.10
223
CAI-dLLM
335.1
18.2×
77.41±1.18
169
Human Eval
No Cache
39.0
1.0×
37.20
425
DualCache
173.0
4.4×
35.98
55
Table 2: Results on LLaDA-8B-Instruct. TPS = tokens/sec; Eng. = energy in Wh. Bold = best. Sample sizes in Appendix A . CAI-dLLM scores show std. err. as ± .
Model
Config.
Pass@1
TPS
LLaDA
ES-dLLM
35.98
139.8
+APD
35.37
424.3
+APD+Block
35.37
434.2
+APD+Block+Budget ⋆
35.37
435.3
Dream
DualCache
45.12
72.5
ES-dLLM
41.46
56.7
Table 3: HumanEval ablation of CAI-dLLM components. ⋆ marks the recommended configuration for each model.
Task
Model
Fixed
CAI
Reduction
GSM8K
LLaDA
256
114
55.5%
GSM8K
Dream
256
141
44.9%
HumanEval
LLaDA
512
315
38.5%
HumanEval
Dream
512
271
47.1%
Table 4: Average denoising steps per request and step reduction relative to fixed budget.
Appendix figures & tables14 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Setting
Reasoning
Code
Commonsense
LongBench
Gen. tokens
256
512
256
512
Block length
64
64
64
32
Batch size
8
8
8
8
Temperature
0
0
0
0
Appendix
Table 5: Generation settings, identical across all compared methods.
Benchmark
Split
Used
Full
Notes
GSM8K
test
1,319
1,319
Full test set
BBH
test
6,511
6,511
Full; 23 subtasks
HumanEval
test
164
164
Full test set
MBPP
test
257
257
Full sanitized set
WinoGrande
validation
500
1,267
Standard eval split
PIQA
validation
1,838
1,838
Full validation set
Appendix
Table 6: Sample sizes per benchmark. Subsets are used only to control evaluation cost, not due to any limitation of CAI-dLLM .
Task
Metric
Samples
Max input
NarrativeQA
F1
100
4,000
MultifieldQA-en
F1
100
4,000
GovReport
ROUGE-L
100
4,000
QMSum
ROUGE-L
100
4,000
Total
–
400
–
Appendix
Table 7: LongBench tasks used in evaluation.
Benchmark
Metric
Tool
GSM8K
Exact match
lm-eval
BBH
Exact match
lm-eval
HumanEval
pass@1
lm-eval
MBPP
pass@1
lm-eval
MathQA
Exact match
lm-eval
WinoGrande
Exact match
lm-eval
Appendix
Table 8: Evaluation metric and tool per benchmark.
Bench.
Dream acc.
LLaDA acc.
Std. err.
GSM8K
77.26%
77.41%
± 1.18 pp
BBH
56.95%
52.33%
± 0.53 pp
MBPP
56.60%
37.00%
± 2.16 pp
HumanEval
48.17%
35.98%
± 3.76 pp
Appendix
Table 9: CAI-dLLM accuracy and standard errors.
Method
Hours
% Total
No cache
77.38
77.9%
ES-dLLM
8.19
8.2%
DualCache
8.07
8.1%
CAI-dLLM
3.89
3.9%
CAI-dLLM no CG
1.85
1.9%
Total
99.38
100%
Appendix
Table 10: Inference GPU-hours by method. CG denotes confidence gating.
Model
Config.
Acc.
TPS
LLaDA
ES-dLLM
77.10
175.3
+APD
76.80
490.2
+APD+Block
76.95
496.0
+APD+Block+Budget ⋆
77.41
335.1
Full CAI, gate off
76.57
320.0
Dream
ES-dLLM
77.48
97.9
Appendix
Table 11: GSM8K ablation of CAI-dLLM components. ⋆ marks the recommended configuration for each model.
Figure 4: Attention sparsity across denoising steps for sampled layers of LLaDA-8B on GSM8K. We sample early, middle, and late transformer layers. The plots show attention entropy, effective tokens attended, and top-10 attention mass. The strong layer-to-layer variation supports layer-aware analysis of diffusion language model inference.
Figure 5: Accuracy across APD schedule configurations on LLaDA-8B GSM8K. The selected cosine schedule with θs=0.90 , θe=0.70 , and w=0.15 gives the best accuracy-speed trade-off.
Figure 6: Hardware behavior across batch sizes. Fixed-threshold parallel decoding and APD are compared with ES-dLLM. The H200 runs the workload in a compute-bound regime, making denoising-step reduction an effective optimization target.
Model
Method
Peak Mem.
vs DualCache
LLaDA
No cache
41,567 MB
+9,260 MB
LLaDA
DualCache
32,307 MB
baseline
LLaDA
ES-dLLM
32,503 MB
+196 MB
LLaDA
CAI-dLLM
32,787 MB
+480 MB
Dream
No cache
44,033 MB
+13,322 MB
Dream
DualCache
30,711 MB
baseline
Appendix
Table 12: Peak GPU memory on HumanEval. The extra memory for CAI-dLLM over DualCache comes from per-token confidence scores, budgets, and threshold tables. Dream’s larger overhead is due to fuller parallel output generation, not CAI-dLLM bookkeeping.
Task
Metric
No cache
DualCache
ES-dLLM
CAI-dLLM
NarrativeQA
F1
18.18
16.96
17.05
16.96
MultifieldQA-en
F1
47.24
45.35
47.95
43.72
GovReport
ROUGE-L
19.99
17.23
16.26
17.09
QMSum
ROUGE-L
13.69
14.59
14.38
14.66
Average score
24.63
23.53
23.69
23.11
Average TPS
2.7
23.4
24.2
51.4
Appendix
Table 13: Detailed LongBench results on Dream-7B. Average score is the unweighted mean of per-task scores.
Task
Model
Method
Avg Power
Energy (J)
Energy (Wh)
Saved
GSM8K
LLaDA
No cache
688.0 W
12,812,627
3559.1
–
GSM8K
LLaDA
DualCache
587.2 W
950,104
263.9
92.6%
GSM8K
LLaDA
ES-dLLM
441.7 W
801,455
222.6
93.7%
GSM8K
LLaDA
CAI-dLLM
558.3 W
607,297
168.7
95.3%
HumanEval
Dream
No cache
673.4 W
1,347,290
374.25
–
HumanEval
Dream
DualCache
550.5 W
215,714
59.92
84.0%
Appendix
Table 14: Detailed energy measurements. The Saved column reports reduction relative to the no-cache row for the same task and model.
Model
Method
L=64
L=128
L=256
L=512
TPS
Speedup
TPS
Speedup
TPS
Speedup
TPS
Speedup
LLaDA
No cache
52.3
1.00 ×
53.8
1.00 ×
54.0
1.00 ×
40.6
1.00 ×
DualCache
51.3
0.98 ×
50.2
0.93 ×
50.8
0.94 ×
51.4
1.27 ×
ES-dLLM
45.4
0.87 ×
46.9
0.87 ×
46.8
0.87 ×
46.9
1.16 ×
CAI-dLLM
108.0
2.07 ×
202.1
3.76 ×
123.6
2.29 ×
186.3
4.59 ×
Dream
No cache
61.5
1.00 ×
63.1
1.00 ×
61.4
1.00 ×
45.3
1.00 ×
Appendix
Table 15: Throughput and speedup over No cache across generation lengths on LLaDA-Instruct and Dream-Instruct. Best TPS for each generation length is shown in bold.
Diffusion large language models (dLLMs) are emerging as a promising alternative to autoregressive models (ARMs) due to their ability to capture bidirectional context and the potential for parallel generation. Despite the advantages, dLLM inference remains computationally expensive as the full input context is processed at every iteration. In this work, we analyze the generation dynamics of dLLMs and find that intermediate representations, including key, value, and hidden states, change only subtly across successive iterations. Leveraging this insight, we propose ES-dLLM, a training-free inference acceleration framework for dLLM that reduces computation by skipping tokens in early layers based on the estimated importance. Token importance is computed with intermediate tensor variation and confidence scores of previous iterations. Experiments on LLaDA-8B and Dream-7B demonstrate that ES-dLLM achieves throughput of up to 226.57 and 308.51 tokens per second (TPS), respectively, on an NVIDIA H200 GPU, delivering 5.6× to 16.8× speedup over the vanilla implementation and up to 1.85× over the state-of-the-art caching method, while preserving generation quality.
Masked diffusion language models enable parallel token decoding, providing a promising alternative to the sequential nature of autoregressive generation. However, their iterative denoising process remains computationally expensive because it repeatedly processes the entire sequence at every step. We observe that across these diffusion steps, most token representations remain stable; only a small subset, which we term salient tokens, contributes meaningfully to the next update. Leveraging this temporal sparsity, we present DyLLM, a training-free inference framework that accelerates decoding by selectively computing only these salient tokens. DyLLM identifies saliency by measuring the cosine similarity of attention contexts between adjacent denoising steps. It recomputes feed-forward and attention operations only for salient tokens while reusing cached activations for the remainder. Across diverse reasoning and code-generation benchmarks, DyLLM achieves up to 9.6x higher throughput while largely preserving the baseline accuracy of representative open-source diffusion LLMs, LLaDA, and Dream.
Younjoo Lee, Seungkyun Dan, Junghoo Lee +2
Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
Diffusion Large Language Models (dLLMs) offer a promising alternative to autoregressive models, excelling in text generation tasks due to their bidirectional attention mechanisms. However, their computational complexity scales on the order of L cubed with the sequence length L. This poses significant challenges for long-sequence and real-time applications, primarily due to the lack of compatibility with key-value caching and the non-autoregressive nature of denoising steps. Existing acceleration methods rely on static caching or parallel decoding strategies, which fail to account for the dynamic behavior of token properties across layers and decoding steps. We propose Dynamic-dLLM, a training-free framework that enhances dLLM inference efficiency through two components: Dynamic Cache Updating (DCU), which adaptively allocates cache-update budgets based on layer-wise token dynamics, and Adaptive Parallel Decoding (APD), which dynamically calibrates decoding thresholds to balance generation quality and efficiency. Extensive experiments on models like LLaDA-8B-Instruct, LLaDA-1.5, and Dream-v0-7B-Instruct across benchmarks such as MMLU, GSM8K, and HumanEval demonstrate that Dynamic-dLLM significantly improves inference speed. It attains an average speedup exceeding 3 times while maintaining performance. Dynamic-dLLM outperforms state-of-the-art acceleration methods and provides a plug-and-play solution for efficient dLLM deployment without compromising performance. The code is available at https://github.com/TianyiWu233/DYNAMIC-DLLM.
Tianyi Wu, Xiaoxi Sun, Yanhua Jiao +5
*Equal contribution. The work is done during Tianyi’s internship at CBG Celia DeviceAI Team, Huawei. · 1Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen · 2Huawei +1