Diffusion language models enable parallel token generation, offering a promising alternative to sequential autoregressive decoding. Existing acceleration methods use predictive confidence to enable parallel token commitment while preserving generation quality. However, confidence-based selection prioritizes reliable token predictions without explicitly considering how token positions shape the remaining decoding schedule. Moreover, such ordering does not always reflect inter-token dependencies, suggesting that confidence need not be the sole criterion for token selection. Motivated by this limitation, we propose Balance-Aware Pivot Decoding (BPD), which favors central pivots within contiguous masked intervals and decodes the selected positions in parallel. Balanced pivots yield logarithmic decoding depth in the interval length. Our practical method accounts for model uncertainty by combining confidence-based prefilling with confidence-thresholded center selection. We evaluate the resulting quality-efficiency tradeoff on LLaDA and Dream across five mathematical reasoning, code generation, and instruction-following benchmarks. Our implementation is available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/DLM_random_pivot-EE62/
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Motivation for position-aware unmasking strategy. Center-based selection promotes balanced partitions, unlike confidence-based selection that may leave long masked intervals.
Figure 2: Overview of Balance-Aware Pivot Decoding (BPD). BPD first commits high-confidence tokens in parallel, then selects one pivot per remaining masked interval. It favors the most central confidence-eligible position to promote balanced splits and reduce decoding depth.
Dataset
Method
LLaDA-8B-Instruct
LLaDA-1.5
Dream-7B
Score ↑
TPS ↑
QTG ↑
Score ↑
TPS ↑
QTG ↑
Score ↑
TPS ↑
QTG ↑
GSM8K
Vanilla
81.65
12.02
1.00 ×
81.88
11.92
1.00 ×
82.87
14.62
1.00 ×
Hierarchy-dLLM
77.94
52.87
4.20 ×
79.45
54.51
4.44 ×
73.54
73.43
4.46 ×
WINO
80.29
46.24
3.78 ×
79.53
46.46
3.79 ×
80.21
55.24
3.66 ×
Fast-dLLM
81.50
52.83
4.39 ×
81.58
54.96
4.59 ×
80.52
74.60
4.96 ×
DAPD
80.44
36.01
2.95 ×
82.03
37.69
3.17 ×
82.56
41.84
2.85 ×
Table 1: Main results on five benchmarks using LLaDA-8B-Instruct, LLaDA-1.5, and Dream-7B. We report generation quality (Score), throughput measured in tokens per second (TPS), and Quality-Throughput Gain (QTG). QTG is the product of relative throughput and relative task performance with respect to vanilla.
Method
GSM8K
MATH
H.Eval
MBPP
IFEval
Vanilla
11.41
12.69
10.99
11.11
12.28
(81.65)
(38.60)
(35.98)
(39.60)
(56.01)
Hierarchy
51.36
48.74
85.36
53.96
37.69
(77.94)
(36.20)
(32.93)
(36.80)
(46.40)
WINO
48.67
33.84
50.23
29.55
21.49
(80.29)
(37.20)
(39.63)
(38.80)
(55.82)
Table 2: Generation quality and throughput on five benchmarks using LLaDA-8B-Instruct. Each method reports TPS in the first row and task performance (Score) in the second row.
Variant
Pass@1
TPS
# Steps
QTG
Vanilla
35.98
10.44
256.00
1.00 ×
w/o KV caching
37.20
54.01
49.21
5.35 ×
w/o Prefilling
33.54
59.15
73.77
5.28 ×
w/ Random Pivot
34.15
68.72
64.20
6.25 ×
w/ Confident Pivot
35.37
62.34
71.79
5.87 ×
Ours
35.98
78.29
55.73
7.50 ×
Table 3: Ablation study on HumanEval using LLaDA-8B-Instruct to examine the contribution of each component. We report generation quality, throughput, and quality-throughput gain (QTG).
Method
Pivoting
Prefilling
Pass@1
TPS
QTG
Pass@1
TPS
QTG
Exact
23.17
76.65
4.73
22.56
108.57
6.52
Margin
25.00
64.96
4.32
29.27
97.41
7.59
Entropy
29.88
63.53
5.05
27.44
94.54
6.91
Random
20.12
69.25
3.71
21.34
102.17
5.80
Ours
33.54
59.15
5.28
35.98
78.29
7.50
Table 4: Comparison of pivot selection strategies with and without confidence-based prefilling on LLaDA-8B-Instruct and HumanEval.
Pivot Type
# Events
# Balanced
BPR (%)
Eligible
2,570
1,451
56.46
Fallback
2,113
423
20.02
Total
4,683
1,874
40.02
Table 5: Balance statistics of BPD pivot selections. The first three iterations of each block and intervals of length at most four are excluded.
Figure 3: Effect of the confidence threshold on generation quality and throughput using LLaDA-8B-Instruct. We report Pass@1 on HumanEval and Accuracy on MBPP, along with tokens per second (TPS). Dotted lines indicate vanilla decoding performance.
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Dataset
Description
Examples
GSM8K ( Cobbe et al., 2021 )
Grade-school mathematical word problems requiring multistep reasoning.
1,319
MATH500 ( Lightman et al., 2024 )
A 500-problem subset of MATH covering competition-level mathematics.
500
HumanEval ( Chen et al., 2021 )
Python function completion from signatures and docstrings, evaluated with unit tests.
164
MBPP ( Austin et al., 2021b )
Basic Python programming problems with natural-language specifications and tests.
500
IFEval ( Zhou et al., 2023 )
Instruction-following prompts with automatically verifiable constraints.
541
Appendix
Table 6: Evaluation benchmarks and split sizes.
Dataset
Method
LLaDA-8B-Instruct
LLaDA-1.5
Dream-7B
Score ↑
TPS ↑
QTG ↑
Score ↑
TPS ↑
QTG ↑
Score ↑
TPS ↑
QTG ↑
GSM8K
Vanilla
81.65
12.02
1.00 ×
81.88
11.92
1.00 ×
82.87
14.62
1.00 ×
Fast-dLLM (prefix)
81.50
52.83
4.39 ×
81.58
54.96
4.59 ×
80.52
74.60
4.96 ×
Fast-dLLM (dual)
80.36
60.37
4.94 ×
82.03
62.16
5.22 ×
82.11
81.74
5.54 ×
Fast-dLLM (parallel)
82.18
35.50
2.97 ×
82.03
36.41
3.06 ×
34.19
26.46
0.75 ×
DOS (top-1)
80.36
12.04
0.99 ×
82.64
12.04
1.02 ×
82.71
14.84
1.01 ×
Appendix
Table 7: Additional results on five benchmarks using LLaDA-8B-Instruct, LLaDA-1.5, and Dream-7B. We report generation quality (Score), throughput measured in tokens per second (TPS), and Quality-Throughput Gain (QTG). QTG is the product of relative throughput and relative task performance with respect to vanilla.
Category
#Inst.
Accuracy (%) ↑
Early Term. (%) ↓
TPS (tok/s) ↑
Hier.
Ours
Hier.
Ours
Hier.
Ours
startend
67
77.6
83.6
60.0
9.1
32.42
42.11
detectable_content
53
45.3
67.9
34.5
0.0
26.83
37.20
keywords
163
57.7
57.7
29.0
7.2
31.82
41.88
combination
65
41.5
66.2
28.9
22.7
49.21
60.11
detectable_format
157
63.7
72.6
22.8
4.7
31.11
43.68
Appendix
Table 8: Instruction-level analysis of IFEval across instruction categories. We report instruction-following accuracy, the proportion of failures attributable to early termination, and decoding TPS (tokens/second) for Hierarchy-dLLM and our method. We define early termination as a failed instruction whose response length falls below 50% of the corresponding vanilla response length.
Case 1: Keyword and Repetition Constraints
Prompt: Write a funny haiku about moms, containing keywords “mom” and “mother” in your response. First repeat the request word for word without change, then give your answer (…)
Hierarchy (16 tokens, Fail)
Ours (42 tokens, Pass)
Write a funny haiku about moms, containing keywords "mom" and "mother
Write a funny haiku about moms, containing keywords "mom" and "mother" in your response.<br><br>Mom’s smile is loud,<br>Mother’s laugh is loud,<br>Laughter all around.
Case 2: Explicit Ending Constraint
Prompt: How to write a good Chinese poem? At the end of your response, please explicitly add a note starting with “P.S.”
Hierarchy (59 tokens, Fail)
Ours (254 tokens, Pass)
Appendix
Table 9: Qualitative comparison between Hierarchy-dLLM and our method on IFEval. Our method satisfies the specified instructions, whereas Hierarchy-dLLM produces incomplete responses. Ellipses indicate omitted text.
Figure 4: Decoding trajectory on HumanEval. Gray bars represent masked intervals, and blue dots indicate committed tokens. Our method recursively partitions masked intervals through center-preferred pivot selection, completing a 32-token block in eight decoding steps.
Diffusion Large Language Models (dLLMs) have emerged as a competitive alternative to autoregressive language models, offering the potential for substantially faster inference through parallel decoding. Existing parallel decoding schedulers typically commit positions only after they meet a per-position criterion, overlooking how early commitments may benefit subsequent decoding. We identify a ripple effect in dLLM decoding: proactively committing a mid-entropy pivot position can induce a pronounced reduction in uncertainty across the remaining masked positions. This uncertainty reduction allows subsequent steps to unmask more tokens in parallel, thereby accelerating the overall decoding process. To exploit the ripple effect, we propose Ripple-Pivot Search (RPS), a novel training-free decoding method that seeks mid-entropy positions as promising candidate pivots (where to decode), and determines their token assignment that yields the greatest downstream benefit via lookahead evaluation (what to decode). Across 3 dLLMs and 4 reasoning and code-generation benchmarks, RPS achieves 4-10× wall-clock speedup over the standard decoder while preserving generation quality, and improves accuracy over the previous lookahead baseline by up to 5.49% while delivering higher throughput in most settings. When integrated with KV caching, RPS further achieves up to 18× wall-clock speedup over the standard decoder.
Yushi Ye, Xu Chen, Haoyun Jiang +7
Cooperative Medianet Innovation Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Alibaba Group
Parallel decoding for Diffusion LLMs (dLLMs) is difficult because each denoising step provides only token-wise marginal distributions, while unmasking multiple tokens simultaneously requires accounting for inter-token dependencies. We propose Dependency-Aware Parallel Decoding (DAPD), a simple, training-free decoding method that uses self-attention to induce a conditional dependency graph over masked tokens. At each iteration, edges in this graph capture strong token interactions, while non-edges indicate weak dependence. Parallel decoding is then reduced to selecting an independent set on the graph and unmasking the selected tokens in parallel. This avoids co-updating strongly coupled tokens without auxiliary models or retraining. Experiments on LLaDA and Dream show that DAPD improves the accuracy-steps trade-off over existing methods and enables more globally distributed parallel updates that better exploit the any-order generation capability of dLLMs. The project is available at https://ai-isl.github.io/dapd
Bumjun Kim, Dongjae Jeon, Moongyu Jeon +1
Department of Artificial Intelligence, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea · Department of Computer Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea
Discrete diffusion language models enable parallel token generation, offering a pathway to low-latency decoding. However, selecting tokens independently by marginal confidence limits effective parallelism: tokens that appear reliable in isolation can form incompatible configurations when several positions are updated at once. We introduce a training-free decoding framework that coordinates these parallel updates. At each forward pass, the method assigns a commit score to each masked position and refines these scores using pairwise interactions derived from the model's predictive distributions. A variational relaxation yields a simple fixed-point update that suppresses conflicting simultaneous commitments within a single forward pass. This mechanism allows the decoder to commit more tokens in parallel while maintaining competitive generation quality. The method is lightweight, requires no auxiliary model or retraining, and drops into existing diffusion decoding pipelines without modification. Experiments on reasoning and code-generation benchmarks show consistent improvements in the quality-latency trade-off.
Tamim Zoabi, Ameen Ali, Liran Ringel +1
School of Electrical & Computer Engineering Tel Aviv University, Israel · School of Computer Science and AI Tel Aviv University, Israel · Department of Computer Science Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Israel