Tree-based speculative decoding verifies multiple draft continuations in one target-model pass, but finite trees built from draft scores face a fundamental draft-target mismatch. We ask whether better exact verification can increase acceptance on a fixed tree and how target feedback can improve the tree itself. Through a target-flow view, we identify a canonical exit law and prove that one plus target coverage sharply bounds the expected output-block length, including the bonus token, of any exact path verifier. All optimal verifiers share the same exit and bonus-token law, already attained by representative predraw-and-follow and sequential residual verifiers. This yields Tree Exit Verification (TEV), an exact, level-parallel procedure using one exit-node decision and one bonus-token decision. The exit law also identifies missing target probability, providing node-level feedback for Exit-Guided Draft-Tree Training (ExitTrain) on inference-time draft trees. Experiments across dialogue, code, and mathematical reasoning validate fixed-tree equivalence: ExitTrain increases average output-block length by 13%, while TEV reduces verifier-stage latency by 15%, yielding a 14% end-to-end speedup over DDTree. Our results distinguish two opportunities: better draft trees for higher acceptance and more direct verification for lower latency. Code: https://github.com/hsj576/TEV.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Target-flow view of tree speculative decoding. Blue denotes selected draft prefixes, gray dashed branches omitted candidates, red target-probability flow, and green reallocated tree budget. (a) Under a finite budget, draft-score-based tree construction can miss target-important branches, causing target mass to exit the tree. (b) On a fixed tree, prior exact verifiers realize the same optimal acceptance law through node-wise draws or tests, whereas TEV realizes it by direct exit-node sampling followed by bonus-token sampling. (c) Exit-guided training reallocates budget toward high-exit boundaries, improving target-mass coverage and output-block length.
Figure 2: Visualization of a fixed-tree.
MT-Bench
HumanEval
GSM8K
MATH-500
Average
Model
Method
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
Temperature = 0
Qwen3-4B
DDTree
3.81
5.41
5.71
8.13
5.65
8.48
6.83
9.16
5.50
7.80
Draft-OPD
4.16
5.73
5.96
8.35
6.11
9.30
7.02
10.14
5.81
8.38
ExitTrain + TEV
4.28
6.17
6.09
8.74
6.91
10.22
7.23
10.26
6.13
8.85
Qwen3-8B
DDTree
3.75
5.54
5.83
8.01
5.88
8.49
6.23
9.76
5.43
7.95
Table 1: Speedup ratio ( SR ) and average output-block length including the bonus token ( τ ) on MT-Bench, HumanEval, GSM8K, and MATH-500. All tree-based systems share the same builder and tree budget B=64 . ExitTrain + TEV combines our exit-guided drafter with TEV.
MT-Bench
HumanEval
GSM8K
MATH-500
Average
Draft training objective
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
Temperature = 0
Original DFlash drafter
3.81
5.41
5.71
8.13
5.65
8.48
6.83
9.16
5.50
7.80
Finetuned DFlash drafter
3.97
5.71
5.83
8.36
6.33
9.54
6.91
9.83
5.76
8.36
Prefix weight P(v)
4.05
5.82
5.99
8.43
6.07
9.25
6.71
9.33
5.71
8.21
Exit weight w(v) (ours)
4.28
6.17
6.09
8.74
6.91
10.22
7.23
10.26
6.13
8.85
Table 2: Effect of the draft-training objective on Qwen3-4B. All three trained drafters share the initialization, the open-perfectblend mixture, the compute budget, the tree builder, and the budget B=64
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
MT-Bench
HumanEval
GSM8K
MATH-500
Average
B
Verifier
ms ↓
red.
ms ↓
red.
ms ↓
red.
ms ↓
red.
ms ↓
red.
Temperature = 0.6
32
Predraw
1.371
—
1.435
—
1.428
—
1.393
—
1.407
—
TEV
1.204
12.2%
1.245
13.2%
1.239
13.2%
1.211
13.0%
1.225
12.9%
64
Predraw
1.392
—
1.487
—
1.443
—
1.488
—
1.453
—
TEV
1.212
12.9%
1.268
14.7%
1.193
17.3%
1.257
15.5%
1.232
15.2%
Appendix
Table 3: Verifier-stage latency per decoding cycle on Qwen3-4B across tree budgets. The measured interval covers verifier decision and cache commit and excludes the shared target-model tree forward pass. For each B , both verifiers use the same drafter, builder, and realized trees.
MT-Bench
HumanEval
GSM8K
MATH-500
Average
Drafter
Verifier
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
Original DFlash
Predraw
3.44
5.04
5.22
7.53
5.48
7.85
5.65
7.88
4.95
7.08
TEV
3.47
5.07
5.22
7.52
5.51
7.88
5.67
7.90
4.97
7.09
Exit-trained DFlash
Predraw
3.95
5.86
5.61
8.05
6.44
9.23
6.22
9.06
5.55
8.05
TEV
3.98
5.86
5.64
8.06
6.47
9.25
6.26
9.08
5.59
8.06
Appendix
Table 4: Crossed drafter–verifier evaluation on Qwen3-4B at T=1 . Each cell reports end-to-end speedup ratio ( SR ) and average output-block length including the bonus token ( τ ). The builder and tree budget B=64 are fixed across all four combinations.
MT-Bench
HumanEval
GSM8K
MATH-500
Average
B
Method
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
SR↑
τ↑
Temperature = 0
32
DDTree
3.69
5.19
5.47
7.74
5.40
8.03
6.50
8.74
5.26
7.43
Draft-OPD
3.91
5.32
5.60
7.82
5.87
8.92
6.84
9.70
5.56
7.94
ExitTrain + TEV
4.11
5.87
5.72
8.22
6.68
9.78
6.94
9.77
5.86
8.41
64
DDTree
3.81
5.41
5.71
8.13
5.65
8.48
6.83
9.16
5.50
7.80
Appendix
Table 5: Qwen3-4B performance across tree budgets on MT-Bench, HumanEval, GSM8K, and MATH-500. ExitTrain is trained at B=64 and evaluated at every budget without retraining.
Speculative decoding accelerates inference by having a lightweight drafter propose tokens verified in parallel by the target language model. Block diffusion drafters such as DFlash generate an entire draft block in one pass, yielding per-position marginals; DDTree uses these to build a candidate tree that maximizes expected acceptance length under a fixed node budget. We observe, however, that acceptance length is non-decreasing in budget: it always favors larger trees regardless of verification cost, offering no principled basis for budget selection. We introduce \textbf{CaDDTree} (Cost-aware Diffusion Draft Tree), a method that directly optimizes token throughput (expected tokens generated per unit time) by jointly selecting the tree structure and node budget. We model draft and verification latencies explicitly, show that the throughput objective decomposes into a per-round one-dimensional search over the budget, and prove that under a convex verification cost the throughput function is \emph{unimodal}, enabling an efficient greedy stopping rule. CaDDTree requires no offline budget search, adapting the budget each round from the current per-position distributions and verification cost. Experiments on Qwen3-4B and Qwen3-8B across eight benchmarks spanning reasoning, coding, and instruction-following tasks show that \caDDTree{} matches or surpasses DDTree with oracle budget selection on nearly all tasks.
Context-aware dynamic trees allocate the speculative decoding budget according to draft path probabilities, adapting their depth and branching to the current context. Under stochastic decoding, however, we find that this structural advantage does not always compensate for the acceptance gains of random sampling paired with advanced verification, and such dynamic trees can fall behind sampled chains in some settings. These trees grow their topology from the candidates themselves, so the tokens submitted for verification are typically the deterministic high-score tokens selected during construction. This coupling is not inherent: once the topology is fixed, its nodes can be repopulated by sampling, allowing dynamic trees to retain their structural advantage while also benefiting from random sampling and advanced verification. Diffusion-based drafters make this practical, as their parallel outputs or lightweight conditional corrections allow candidates to be regenerated cheaply after the complete topology is known. We introduce Tsubame, a two-pass tree speculative decoding framework for diffusion-based drafters. The first pass plans and freezes a context-aware topology using draft path scores; the second replays the fixed topology, sampling the tokens that populate its nodes to form the candidate tree for verification. We prove that Tsubame is lossless under compatible sampling and verification strategies. Experiments across three diffusion-based drafters, six datasets, and multiple candidate budgets show that Tsubame improves acceptance length and throughput over deterministic trees, including settings where it reverses their disadvantage against sampled chains.
Yepeng Weng, Qiao Hu, Takehisa Yairi
The University of Tokyo · National Center for Mathematics and Interdisciplinary Sciences (NCMIS), AMSS, CAS
Speculative decoding accelerates Large Language Models via draft-then-verify, where verification can be framed as an Optimal Transport (OT) problem. Existing approaches typically handle multi-draft and multi-step aspects in isolation, applying either flat OT to single-step drafts or per-token rejection sampling to tree-structured candidates. This separation leaves the joint regime (where multi-step dependencies meet multi-draft branching) poorly optimized, as local verification rules fail to exploit the coupling between horizontal and vertical dimensions of candidate trees. In this paper, we propose a unified perspective that casts tree-based verification as a conditional OT problem. Our key insight is that vertical dependencies can be abstracted through prefix acceptance probabilities, which act as dynamic scaling factors to actively guide horizontal draft selection. Based on this principle, we introduce UniVer, a verification algorithm that jointly optimizes across tree levels by composing local optimal transport plans under prefix constraints. We prove that UniVer remains lossless and achieves the optimal acceptance rate under the proposed conditional framework. Extensive experiments across different tasks and models demonstrate that UniVer improves acceptance length by 4.2% to 8.5% over standard recursive rejection sampling without replacement, while maintaining exact distributional alignment with the target model.
Yepeng Weng, Qiao Hu, Takehisa Yairi
The University of Tokyo · 2Lenovo AI Technology Center · National Center for Mathematics and Interdisciplinary Sciences (NCMIS), AMSS, CAS