Organizations: ITMO University, Kronverksky Pr. 49, bldg. A, St. Petersburg, 197101, Russia · AXXX, 5 Nizhny Susalny Pereulok, bldg. 19, Moscow, 105064, Russia
Deep research systems iteratively plan, gather evidence, synthesize, and revise, making end-to-end latency a key bottleneck for interactive use. Almost all production systems are built on autoregressive (AR) language models and inherit left-to-right decoding in planning and long-form writing. We present DiffResearch, an open multi-agent deep research framework that places a diffusion language model (dLLM) at the core of every stage, and measure how a diffusion backbone changes latency and report quality. Holding the agentic scaffold, retrieval code, prompts, and evaluation fixed, we swap the backbone between an open diffusion model and a comparable AR model. Across 100 Deep Research Bench tasks, the diffusion backbone is roughly 6 times faster end-to-end, driven by order-of-magnitude reductions in planning and writing. We further introduce dFast, a decomposition mode that reads intermediate denoising states and extracts subqueries before generation finishes, providing a 1.99 times median speedup for decomposition in isolation with no loss of report quality. On the benchmark's RACE rubric, dFast obtains the best overall score among the three configurations. Finally, in a public system-level leaderboard snapshot, an instance built on a stronger diffusion model ranks above several commercial systems. We release DiffResearch under an Apache-2.0 license.
Figures & tables
Mode
mean
p50
p90
vs AR
AR
71.45
48.78
111.87
1.0×
dFull
11.89
11.87
16.13
6.0×
dFast
11.97
12.07
16.33
6.0×
Table 1: End-to-end latency (seconds) over the 100 Deep Research Bench tasks. Both diffusion modes are about 6× faster than AR, while dFast provides no additional end-to-end reduction over dFull.
Stage
AR
dFull
dFast
Planner
39.32
3.68
3.64
Decomposer
3.69
0.62
0.36
Retrieval †
3.94
4.83
4.59
Writer ‡
59.78
5.11
5.29
Table 2: Mean per-stage latency (seconds). † Retrieval is a shared Semantic Scholar call, not a model call. ‡ Writer is measured over tasks that reached the writing stage. The model-bound planner and writer stages drive the ∼10 – 12× stage-level speedups.
Extraction point
Mean
P50
P90
P95
First exact-6
268.5
243.4
292.4
338.7
Stable exact-6
475.7
468.4
537.0
581.1
Full generation
499.7
484.9
579.8
629.9
Table 3: Isolated decomposition-latency probe over 100 queries (milliseconds; model loading excluded). Reading the first exact-count JSON from intermediate denoising states is 1.99× faster at the median than full generation; the stable object is 1.04× faster but matches the final answer in 91 of 100 cases.
(a) RACE dimensions
Mode
Overall
Comp.
Insight
Inst.
Read.
dFull
0.3895
0.3577
0.3518
0.4489
0.4328
dFast
0.3969
0.3624
0.3556
0.4610
0.4412
AR
0.3904
0.3413
0.3612
0.4436
0.4438
(b) Language diagnostics over successful reports (means)
Mode/lang
RACE
Chars
Cites
Heads
Table 4: Quality diagnostics. Panel (a): RACE with cleaning and a Gemini 2.5 Pro evaluator. Panel (b): language-specific available-case means; Chars are complete-report non-whitespace characters, Cites are numeric inline citation groups, and Heads are H2–H6 content headings.
System
Overall
Insight
Read.
DiffResearch (Mercury)
48.03
48.20
47.40
OpenAI Deep Research
46.45
43.73
47.22
UESTC-MBSE-RAAA
46.13
48.34
43.78
Dr. Tulu
45.49
44.65
42.30
Claude Research
45.00
42.79
44.66
Kimi Researcher
44.64
41.97
45.59
Table 5: Public Deep Research Bench leaderboard snapshot (RACE, 0–100). The complete Mercury-backed DiffResearch system ranks above several listed commercial systems; this comparison does not isolate diffusion decoding.