Leveraging Inference-Time Compute for Diffusion Models via Global Scheduling of Denoising Trajectories
Organizations: School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University · Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research & BAIR Lab, University of California, Berkeley
Abstract
Diffusion models generate a sample by traversing a denoising trajectory, a sequence of stochastic noise-reduction steps that transforms pure noise into a draw from a target distribution. At deployment time, additional computation can improve sample quality without retraining: at each step, the sampler draws several candidate noise samples, scores the resulting predictions with a quality criterion called the verifier, and retains the best candidate at the cost of one network evaluation per candidate. This raises a resource allocation question: given a fixed budget of function evaluations, how should search effort be distributed across the steps of the denoising trajectory? We formulate this as a computational budget allocation problem. First, we show that, to leading order in the step size, the expected gain from evaluating candidates at a step factorizes into an endogenous, step-specific sensitivity parameter times a universal sample-size factor equal to the expected best of standard-normal draws. Second, for a fixed sensitivity profile, the optimal allocation solves a separable concave integer program with water-filling structure; at fixed total sensitivity, its advantage over uniform allocation increases with sensitivity dispersion in the majorization order. Third, we prove that when sensitivities vary across instances, no adaptive policy can avoid worst-case regret that grows linearly in the trajectory length, which motivates a design that anchors the allocation offline and adapts online only to recover instance-specific slack. We extend the analysis from independent random search to a broader family of local search operators, and instantiate it as an implementable algorithm. Experiments on three families of diffusion samplers show that the proposed allocation attains the quality of the uniform benchmark with 20 to 50 percent fewer function evaluations.
Figures & tables
| Operator | Gain sequence | Growth rate | Status |
| Random search | Exact | ||
| -greedy | , | Lower bound | |
| Local perturbation | Exact in the idealization |
| Stable Diffusion (budget ) | ||||
| Verifier | Policy | 400 | 500 | 800 |
| Brightness | Uniform | |||
| GAINS | ||||
| Compressibility | Uniform | |||
| GAINS | ||||
| EDM (budget ) | ||||
| Verifier | Uniform | Offline only | GAINS (offline + online) |
| Brightness | |||
| Compressibility |
| Policy | Brightness | Compressibility |
| Uniform | ||
| GAINS |
| Uniform | GAINS | |||
| Verifier | Zero-order | Random | Zero-order | Random |
| Brightness | ||||
| Compressibility | ||||
| Budget | ||||
| Verifier | Policy | 80 | 100 | 150 |
| Brightness | Uniform | |||
| GAINS | ||||
| Compressibility | Uniform | |||
| GAINS | ||||
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Procedure | Actions used | Backtracks? | Schedule |
| Plain sampling | Fwd | No | for all |
| Best-of- ( Ma et al. 2025 ) | Fwd | No | full trajectories |
| -greedy ( Ramesh and Mardani 2025 ) | EpsG, Fwd | No | Uniform |
| Direct noise optimization ( Tang et al. 2024 ) | Zero, Fwd | No | Uniform |
| Rollover budget forcing ( Kim et al. 2025 ) | Rand, Fwd | No | Online rollover |
| T-SCEND ( Zhang et al. 2025b ) | Rand, Fwd | No | Fixed two-phase |
Inference-Time Compute Allocation
Inference-time compute allocation decides where, when, and how much computation models spend during prediction to improve quality under resource limits.
See all 82 papers