Parallel generation is widely regarded as an inherent advantage of diffusion large language models. Yet our fixed-quota evaluation of four representative models reveals severe degradation across mathematics and code, with all scores below 15% at 16 tokens per step. Token-level probes identify local predictive potential near the observed prefix, especially in mathematical text. We propose RePara, which reinforces short consecutive token blocks through group-relative policy optimization and reduces rollout and log-probability recomputation costs. On LLaDA and SDAR, \ours improves GSM8K and MATH-500 accuracy over JustGRPO under reduced denoising budgets, with a 1.96x training-step speedup in our LLaDA/MATH setup.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Generation order and decoding parallelism in dLLMs. Arbitrary-order decoding commits potentially nonconsecutive positions; causal-order decoding commits consecutive blocks from left to right. Token numbers indicate commitment steps; equal numbers denote parallel commitment, and darker shades denote later steps.
Figure 2: Task performance across decoding granularities. Four representative dLLMs are evaluated on mathematical reasoning (GSM8K and MATH-500) and code generation (HumanEval and MBPP) with a 512-token generation budget.
Figure 3: Local predictive potential in mathematical text and code. Dashed lines mark h80 , the 80% retention boundary relative to the first position for Probability, Confidence, or inverse perplexity e−H . Entropy is plotted in nats; boundary definitions are in Appendix A.2 .
Figure 4: Local prediction across clean-prefix lengths. Each cell averages 2,000 sequences at a fixed target position and prefix length. Red outlines apply the h80 criterion from Figure 3 relative to each row’s first position. Entropy colors show raw nats.
Figure 5: Consecutive vs. confidence-based decoding at matched token quotas. Filled/hollow markers denote confidence-based/consecutive decoding. Scores and generation budget follow Figure 2 .
Figure 6: Overview of RePara: Reinforcement Learning with Multi-Token Rollouts. (a) JustGRPO generates one token per forward pass. (b) RePara samples consecutive token blocks from a shared masked state in a single forward pass and optimizes their joint probabilities with GRPO. For an N -token completion, committing an average of M tokens per block reduces the forward-pass count from N to N/M for both rollout generation and training-time log-probability recomputation.
Model
GSM8K
MATH-500
Diff# k
1
2
4
8
16
1
2
4
8
16
LLaDA-8B-Instruct
81.50
81.12
75.89
45.94
5.08
44.40
41.20
31.60
17.60
4.20
LLaDA-1.5
82.64
81.05
76.72
48.14
6.82
43.20
40.20
36.40
20.00
6.80
ESPO
85.14
82.64
76.42
46.70
7.43
45.20
42.20
34.20
20.00
5.60
d-TreeRPO
83.85
82.03
77.10
47.84
6.52
41.20
40.60
36.20
19.00
7.60
wd1-Math
82.03
81.88
75.59
44.96
5.23
44.40
38.80
33.60
16.20
6.00
Table 1: LLaDA accuracy (%, ↑ ) at L=512 . Colors mark Best , Second best , and Third best per column; ties share a rank at the reported precision.
Figure 7: LLaDA accuracy (top) and gains over the backbone in pp. (bottom) at L=512 . Arrows show nominal TPD ratios to the backbone at matched accuracy, interpolated on the log-rate axis.
Model
GSM8K
MATH-500
Diff# k
1
2
4
1
2
4
SDAR-8B-Chat
90.75
55.12
74.45
50.00
36.20
28.20
JustGRPO
82.11
55.12
46.63
54.20
34.20
35.40
RePara
85.37
72.63
81.80
52.40
39.80
40.40
Table 2: SDAR accuracy (%, ↑ ) at L=512 under dynamic threshold decoding. Bold marks the best score per column.
Training setting
Core
Step
Core speedup
JustGRPO
422.64
427.89
1.00×
Fix2
213.39
218.60
1.98×
Adaptive2-0.95
372.26
377.66
1.14×
Table 3: LLaDA mathematical training efficiency on the same 127 steps. Core time includes rollout, reward processing, learner computation, and optimizer updates; step time also includes checkpoint and metric-preparation costs. Times are seconds per optimizer step; speedup is relative to JustGRPO.
Setting
Diff# k
1
2
4
8
16
JustGRPO
87.95
87.49
85.60
75.06
28.20
Adaptive2-0.80
86.81
86.73
84.31
81.27
66.34
Adaptive2-0.90
87.11
86.50
83.17
76.65
51.78
Adaptive2-0.95
88.48
87.19
86.35
81.35
47.76
Table 4: LLaDA/GSM8K accuracy (%) by adaptive training threshold at L=512 and B=2 . Bold marks the best score per column.
Appendix figures & tables12 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Hyperparameter
Value
Optimizer
AdamW ( Loshchilov and Hutter, 2019 )
Learning rate
5×10−6 , constant
AdamW (β1,β2)
(0.9,0.999)
AdamW ϵ
10−8
Weight decay
0
Gradient norm limit
1.0
Appendix
Table 5: Shared training configuration for JustGRPO and RePara on GSM8K, MATH, and AceCode.
Study
Changes
Basic comparison
Fixed/adaptive two-token coding rollouts.
Medium data
AceCode-Medium replaces AceCode-Hard.
JustGRPO initialization
Multi-token RL starts from a JustGRPO checkpoint.
Appendix
Table 6: Coding studies and their changes.
Model / training setting
GSM8K
MATH-500
Diff# k
1
2
4
8
16
1
2
4
8
16
L=128
LLaDA-8B-Instruct
75.97
74.00
58.53
40.71
16.60
37.40
32.60
25.40
14.20
8.60
LLaDA-1.5
77.48
75.06
61.41
43.97
26.46
36.40
33.60
28.60
17.60
12.60
ESPO
80.06
74.60
60.96
39.65
21.23
38.60
32.20
26.20
19.40
10.40
d-TreeRPO
77.33
75.21
60.96
45.26
19.11
36.40
35.00
28.40
19.20
14.00
Appendix
Table 7: Detailed LLaDA accuracy (%, ↑ ) on GSM8K and MATH-500 at generation lengths L∈{128,256,512} . Nominal TPD is k=L/S , where S is the total number of denoising steps. RePara uses Fix2 . Best , Second best , and Third best are marked within each length, benchmark, and nominal TPD; ranks use the reported two-decimal scores, and ties share a rank.
Setting
Steps
Diff#1
Diff#2
Diff#4
LLaDA
Fix2
128
42.60
43.60
42.40
Fix4
128
39.80
38.40
37.40
Fix2 → Fix4
128+128
43.00
42.00
41.20
SDAR
Fix2
128
49.20
39.00
40.00
Appendix
Table 8: Training block-size ablation on MATH-500 at L=256 and sampling temperature 0 . Entries are accuracy (%) under the same Diff# k settings as the main comparisons. Steps count optimizer updates; the staged setting adds 128 updates with B=4 to Fix2 . Bold marks the highest accuracy within each model and decoding setting.
L
Model
GSM8K
MATH-500
Diff# k
1
2
4
1
2
4
128
SDAR-8B-Chat
39.80
30.17
35.71
3.80
3.20
4.60
JustGRPO
52.16
40.64
35.25
39.20
30.20
31.60
RePara ( Fix2 )
60.27
53.98
59.51
39.20
33.60
33.80
256
SDAR-8B-Chat
86.66
53.83
72.40
20.40
15.60
14.00
JustGRPO
81.05
53.90
45.64
53.00
34.20
35.20
Appendix
Table 9: Accuracy (%, ↑ ) with SDAR at generation lengths L=128,256,512 and temperature 0 . Higher nominal TPD k uses fewer scheduled denoising rounds. Trained methods use step-128 checkpoints; RePara uses fixed two-token training blocks. Bold marks the best score within each generation length, benchmark, and nominal TPD; ties are bolded.
Figure 8: Effect of the adaptive training threshold on LLaDA GSM8K accuracy (%) with sampling temperature 0 . The maximum proposal length is two tokens. Panels show generation lengths L=128,256,512 ; the horizontal axis is nominal TPD k=L/S . JustGRPO is included as a reference.
Figure 9: LLaDA mathematical training efficiency. Adaptive denotes Adaptive2-0.95 . Panel (a) shows the 128-step training traces; panels (b) and (c) summarize the 127 common recorded steps. Logical blocks are averaged per completion and executed rounds per optimizer step.
Metric
JustGRPO
Fix2
Adaptive
Rollout generation
101.22
51.04
89.54
Log-probability
115.33
56.23
100.83
Backward
202.33
102.13
177.99
Appendix
Table 10: Mean phase times (seconds per optimizer step) for LLaDA mathematical training over the 127 common steps. Adaptive denotes Adaptive2-0.95 ; rollout denotes generation only. Overall core and measured step times are reported in Table 3 .
Figure 10: Mean block length during LLaDA training on GSM8K (left) and MATH (right). The adaptive policy is shown alongside JustGRPO and Fix2 . The horizontal axis is the training step.
Metric
JustGRPO
Fix2
Adaptive
Mean block length
1.00
2.00
1.67
Logical blocks
256.00
128.00
153.23
Executed rounds
256.00
128.00
222.23
Inactive row–round slots
0.0%
0.0%
31.1%
Appendix
Table 11: Logical blocks and executed rounds over the same 127 steps. Adaptive denotes Adaptive2-0.95 . Mean block length pools committed tokens and logical blocks; the other counts are averaged per completion or training step.
Training setting
HumanEval
MBPP
Backbone
38.41
40.20
JustGRPO
50.00
47.60
Fix2
10.98
14.60
Adaptive2-0.95
15.24
29.40
Appendix
Table 12: Coding Pass@1 (%) under a common diffusion decoder ( L=S=256 , window size 32, temperature zero). Trained methods use their fixed step-128 endpoints.
Figure 11: Coding evaluation after 128 additional multi-token training updates from a JustGRPO checkpoint, at L=512 and temperature zero. Gains at higher diffusion quotas coexist with accuracy losses at quota one.
Diffusion Large Language Models (dLLMs) have emerged as a promising paradigm for parallel token generation, with block-wise variants garnering significant research interest. Despite their potential, existing dLLMs typically suffer from a rigid accuracy-parallelism trade-off: increasing the number of tokens per forward (TPF) via aggressive parallel decoding often leads to performance degradation and increased generation instability. We identify that this limitation stems from the model's inability to navigate high-parallelism regimes where approximation errors and local corruptions accumulate, ultimately undermining the reliability of parallel generation. To address this, we propose LightningRL, a post-training framework designed to directly optimize the speed-quality Pareto frontier of pre-trained dLLMs. Instead of forcing uniform parallelization, our approach leverages reinforcement learning to identify and reinforce high-parallelism trajectories that maintain generation accuracy. Built upon the Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) framework, LightningRL introduces several enhancements tailored for dLLMs: (1) stabilized training via per-reward decoupled normalization; (2) token-level negative log-likelihood (NLL) regularization on correct trajectories to anchor model performance; and (3) a dynamic sampling strategy with TPF-aware filtering to enhance training efficiency. Experimental results across mathematical and coding benchmarks demonstrate that LightningRL consistently advances the Pareto frontier, achieving competitive task accuracy while significantly increasing parallelism, reaching an average TPF of 7.32 (with a peak of 11.10 on the MBPP dataset). Our code is available at https://github.com/SJTU-DENG-Lab/LightningRL.
Yanzhe Hu, Yijie Jin, Pengfei Liu +2
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Huazhong University of Science and Technology
A popular selling point of diffusion large language models (dLLMs) is their capacity for parallelism: the ability to generate sequences of text far more efficiently than autoregressive models, which require one forward pass per token. Yet among the many competing paradigms for dLLMs, from masked to uniform to Gaussian diffusion, principled understanding of how these different proposals compare in parallelism remains limited. In this work, we initiate a fine-grained comparison of the capacity for parallelism among these three leading approaches and prove the following: - Uniform and Gaussian diffusion can sample in a number of forward passes which scales with the dual total correlation of the underlying distribution, a measure of intrinsic complexity which can be much smaller than the context length. Previously, it was only known how to achieve this using masked diffusion. - For a certain family of random empirical measures, we show that Θ(d) forward passes are necessary and sufficient to sample using uniform or Gaussian diffusion, yet there exist approximate score oracles for which Ω(d) forward passes are needed for masked diffusion. This establishes the first provable separation in parallelism between the three prevailing dLLM paradigms. Contrary to popular intuition that masked diffusions are harder to parallelize because they must commit to token values, the latter separation instead comes from the fact that the critical windows in masked diffusion sampling are asymptotically narrower than those in uniform and Gaussian diffusion sampling.
Diffusion large language models (dLLMs) generate text by iteratively denoising masked token sequences. Although dLLMs can predict all masked positions in parallel within each step, the large number of denoising iterations still makes inference expensive. This cost can be reduced spatially by unmasking multiple tokens per step, or temporally by collapsing multiple denoising steps into one verification call. We propose Parallel Speculative Decoding (PSD), a training-free framework that jointly improves inference along both axes. Using the confidence scores from a single forward pass, PSD selects positions to unmask via a configurable, adaptive unmasking policy and constructs multi-depth speculative drafts without extra model calls. A final batched verification pass then applies hierarchical acceptance, keeping the deepest draft that remains consistent with the updated predictions. Experiments on three dLLMs across reasoning and code generation tasks show that PSD achieves favorable trade-offs between inference efficiency and generation quality, reaching up to 5.5× tokens per forward pass with accuracy comparable to greedy decoding.
Shengyin Sun, Yiming Li, Renxi Liu +7
Department of Computer Science City University of Hong Kong · Huawei Technologies · City University of Hong Kong