Organizations: Tongji University · Nanyang Technological University · Marquette University · Tencent · University of Surrey · University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · Peking University
Tree-based speculative decoding accelerates large language model inference by verifying multiple candidate branches in parallel. However, in practical serving scenarios, similar requests repeatedly induce overlapping candidate branches. While retrieval-based methods mitigate this by reusing historical drafts, the resulting candidate trees often contain many low-quality branches as the candidate tree grows, which reduces verification efficiency and wastes target-side computation. To address this, we propose ValuSpec, a plug-and-play candidate valuation mechanism that filters low-quality branches from a supplied candidate tree before expensive target-side verification. ValuSpec introduces transfer-based supervision to align filtering with the target model's behavior. A filtering threshold is estimated from the target model's greedy trajectories on a calibration split, without any parameter training. The target model then verifies the filtered tree under the output-identical greedy rule, so accepted tokens are guaranteed to match standard autoregressive decoding exactly. Experimental results on HumanEval, GSM8K, Dolly, and SpecBench show that, in our main evaluation, ValuSpec achieves up to 2.38x end-to-end speedup in retrieval-based tree settings. Furthermore, integrating ValuSpec into the EAGLE-3 dynamic tree framework yields up to 2.78x end-to-end speedup without modifying its tree construction strategy, demonstrating that ValuSpec serves as a generally applicable and plug-and-play candidate valuation module.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Candidate quality and verification efficiency. (A) Low-quality candidate tokens waste target-side verification budget in SD. Candidate tokens that deviate from the target model’s greedy trajectory are rejected, yet still consume verification computation without contributing to decoding progress. (B) Acceptance rate versus candidate draft length on Dolly (A100) using Llama-2-7b-chat-hf. Acceptance decreases monotonically as the candidate draft length grows, indicating increasing redundancy and a higher proportion of low-quality candidates.
Figure 2: Comparison of speculative decoding paradigms. Conventional speculative decoding generates candidates online for each request, leading to repeated computation under similar inputs. Retrieval-based speculative decoding reuses historical candidates but introduces large candidate trees with many low-quality candidates that waste target-side verification. ValuSpec is a plug-and-play candidate valuation mechanism to filter low-quality candidates from the supplied tree before target-side verification, reducing verification redundancy without modifying candidate construction.
Figure 3: Overview of ValuSpec. ValuSpec decouples candidate supply from candidate valuation using two disjoint splits of the same database D . A candidate tree Tx is supplied from Deval , while a lightweight draft model qϕ is calibrated on target greedy trajectories from Dcal to filter low-quality branches before target-side verification. The target model pθ then verifies the filtered subtree Txfiltered with tree masking/attention and accepts the longest greedy-consistent prefix, producing the final output sequence Y under output-identical decoding.
Figure 4: Main results of ValuSpec under output-identical decoding across three decoding loads. ValuSpec uses n=4 , draft tokens =64 , and δ=0.05 for all tasks.
Llama-2-7B
Llama-2-13B
Task
AR
SD ( n=3 )
Retrieval SD
ValuSpec
AR
SD ( n=3 )
Retrieval SD
ValuSpec
HumanEval-x-python
23.56 (1.00 × )
29.20 (1.24 × )
40.64 (1.72 × )
54.44 (2.31 × )
19.43 (1.00 × )
25.27 (1.30 × )
33.61 (1.73 × )
46.18 (2.38 × )
GSM8K-main-test
23.97 (1.00 × )
32.07 (1.34 × )
41.36 (1.73 × )
53.02 (2.21 × )
20.43 (1.00 × )
28.32 (1.39 × )
36.99 (1.81 × )
45.76 (2.24 × )
Dolly
25.74 (1.00 × )
34.89 (1.36 × )
45.68 (1.77 × )
56.19 (2.18 × )
17.90 (1.00 × )
26.99 (1.51 × )
34.73 (1.94 × )
41.74 (2.33 × )
Table 1: Recurring-workload evaluation. Throughput (tokens/s) under output-identical decoding on A100, with speedup over AR shown in parentheses. SD uses n=3 ; Retrieval SD uses a REST-style tree with 64 draft tokens; ValuSpec uses n=4 , 64 draft tokens, and δ=0.05 .
Llama-2-7B
Llama-2-13B
Calibration
Evaluation
AR
ValuSpec
AR
ValuSpec
HumanEval
GSM8K
23.97 (1.00 × )
51.94 (2.17 × )
20.43 (1.00 × )
44.32 (2.17 × )
Dolly
25.74 (1.00 × )
52.71 (2.05 × )
17.90 (1.00 × )
40.03 (2.24 × )
GSM8K
HumanEval
23.56 (1.00 × )
53.96 (2.29 × )
19.43 (1.00 × )
45.72 (2.35 × )
Dolly
25.74 (1.00 × )
53.65 (2.08 × )
17.90 (1.00 × )
40.16 (2.24 × )
Dolly
HumanEval
23.56 (1.00 × )
52.73 (2.24 × )
19.43 (1.00 × )
44.76 (2.30 × )
Table 2: Cross-dataset threshold transfer. The threshold is calibrated on the 70% split of one dataset and transferred to another without re-calibration. We report throughput (tokens/s), with speedup over AR shown in parentheses.
Throughput (tok/s)
Speedup
Dataset
AR
EAGLE-3
EAGLE-3 + ValuSpec
vs. EAGLE-3
vs. AR
HumanEval
35.30
69.10
93.28
1.35 ×
2.64 ×
GSM8K
35.30
70.40
98.25
1.40 ×
2.78 ×
Dolly
35.30
55.20
83.66
1.52 ×
2.37 ×
SpecBench
35.30
47.70
69.17
1.45 ×
1.96 ×
Table 3: Verifier-side integration with EAGLE-3. Throughput (tokens/s) on Meta-Llama/Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct. ValuSpec is applied after EAGLE-3 tree construction and before target verification, without modifying the upstream generation procedure.
Metric
Standard SD
Retrieval-SD
EAGLE-3
Candidate-supplier compatibility
Marginal speedup
1.63–1.89 ×
1.97–2.14 ×
1.38–1.61 ×
Cross-dataset threshold transfer
Marginal speedup
1.24–1.63 ×
1.78–2.01 ×
1.33–1.46 ×
Fixed-threshold comparison
Best fixed → ValuSpec
58.26 → 79.78
87.15 → 113.16
78.03 → 90.49
Table 4: Additional validation on Qwen3.5. Results across Standard SD, Retrieval-SD, and EAGLE-3. Speedup ranges are across HumanEval, GSM8K, and Dolly; cross-dataset ranges summarize all transfer directions. “Fixed” denotes the best fixed likelihood threshold in [0.3,0.8] on HumanEval.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Database
Method
A100 / 7b
A100 / 13b
RTX 4090 / 7b
Thpt
Speedup
Hit
Thpt
Speedup
Hit
Thpt
Speedup
Hit
Dolly
AR
25.74
–
–
17.90
–
–
51.89
–
–
Dolly
SD n=1
32.68
1.27
0.46
24.48
1.37
0.43
61.74
1.19
0.45
Dolly
SD n=2
34.37
1.34
0.33
25.85
1.44
0.32
65.71
1.27
0.33
Dolly
SD n=3
34.89
1.36
0.26
26.99
1.51
0.22
66.14
1.27
0.25
Dolly
SD n=4
33.92
1.32
0.21
26.44
1.48
0.20
64.18
1.24
0.20
Appendix
Table 5: Combined ablations on Dolly: SD (throughput / speedup / hit rate) across hardware/model settings, plus ValuSpec (throughput / speedup) with a fixed tree configuration (draft tokens =64 ). “–” indicates not applicable or not reported.
Database
Method
A100 / 7b
A100 / 13b
RTX 4090 / 7b
Thpt
Speedup
Hit
Thpt
Speedup
Hit
Thpt
Speedup
Hit
HumanEval
AR
23.56
–
–
19.43
–
–
49.18
–
–
HumanEval
SD n=1
27.87
1.18
0.35
23.26
1.20
0.34
57.32
1.17
0.32
HumanEval
SD n=2
28.68
1.22
0.24
24.69
1.27
0.23
58.23
1.18
0.25
HumanEval
SD n=3
29.20
1.24
0.18
25.27
1.30
0.19
58.29
1.19
0.18
HumanEval
SD n=4
28.88
1.23
0.17
24.21
1.25
0.15
54.89
1.12
0.14
Appendix
Table 6: Combined ablations on HumanEval and GSM8K: SD (throughput / speedup / hit rate) across hardware/model settings, plus ValuSpec (throughput / speedup). “–” indicates not applicable or not reported.
Figure 5: Cross-GPU ablations on RTX 4090. End-to-end throughput (tokens/s) and speedup over autoregressive decoding (AR) on GSM8K, HumanEval, and Dolly using Llama-2-7b-chat-hf (target) and JackFram/LLaMA-68M. We compare AR, SD ( n=3 ), Retrieval SD (draft tokens =64 ), and ValuSpec (ours). Here, 7B denotes Llama-2-7b-chat-hf.
Txfiltered←{b∈Tx:sϕ(b∣x)≥τtr}
Appendix
Algorithm 1 ValuSpec (offline threshold calibration on Dcal + online filtering of candidate trees from Deval )
Speculative decoding accelerates large language model inference through a draft-then-verify paradigm. Building on this, tree-structured methods improve inference by organizing proposals into multiple candidate paths, increasing the accepted length. However, existing tree-structured methods use a single drafter for all drafting steps, creating a dilemma: a smaller drafter is fast but yields lower-quality trees, whereas a larger drafter improves tree quality but suffers from high latency. To address this, we propose TreeGraft, a multi-drafter framework in which drafters of different costs jointly construct a shared draft tree. TreeGraft uses the stronger drafter to rescore candidates by updating scores assigned by the weaker drafter, reselect grafting positions, and recover promising paths left unexplored. It also integrates stronger drafter expansions non-destructively, preserving existing branches that may still be accepted by the target model. Together, these designs improve the quality of the shared draft tree. To control the drafting cost, TreeGraft introduces a lightweight scheduler distilled from an offline value system to decide when to call the stronger drafter. Across 10 model pairs and 6 benchmarks, TreeGraft outperforms the better of the two fixed single-drafter endpoint strategies by 15.1% on average, reaching a maximum gain of 26.6%. Our code is available at https://github.com/fjm9933/TreeGraft.
Jiaming Fan, Daming Cao, Canchen Huang +6
Key Laboratory of New Generation Artificial Intelligence Technology and Its Interdisciplinary Applications (Southeast University), Ministry of Education, China · Southeast University · Ant Group +1
Speculative decoding is an effective technique for accelerating large language model inference by drafting multiple tokens in parallel. In practice, its speedup is often bottlenecked by a rigid verification step that strictly enforces the accepted token distribution to exactly match the target model. This constraint leads to the rejection of many plausible tokens, lowering the acceptance rate and limiting overall time speedup. To overcome this limitation, we propose Dynamic Verification Relaxed Speculative Decoding (DIVERSED), a relaxed verification framework that improves time efficiency while preserving generation quality. DIVERSED learns an ensemble-based verifier that blends the draft and target model distributions with a task-dependent and context-dependent weight. We provide theoretical justification for our approach and demonstrate empirically that DIVERSED achieves substantially higher inference efficiency compared to standard speculative decoding methods. Code is available at: https://github.com/comeusr/diversed.
Ziyi Wang, Siva Rajesh Kasa, Ankith M S +6
Purdue University · Amazon Inc. · University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign +1
Multi-path speculative decoding accelerates lossless sampling from a target model by using a cheaper draft model to generate a draft tree of tokens, and then applies a verification algorithm that accepts a subset of these. While prior work has proposed various verification algorithms for i.i.d rollouts, their relative performance under matched settings remains unclear. In this work, we firstly present a systematic evaluation of verification strategies across model families, tasks, and sampling regimes, and find that Traversal Verification dominates consistently, with OT-based methods lagging far behind. Our analysis uncovers that this occurs because OT-based methods achieve high multi-token acceptance near the root of the draft tree, while multi-token gains are most impactful deeper in the draft tree, where draft and target distributions diverge. Based on this insight, we propose delayed tree expansion, which drafts a partial single path, delaying the i.i.d. branching point. We show that delayed tree expansion preserves the target distribution and improves on root-node i.i.d rollouts. Further, we develop a dynamic neural selector that estimates the expected block efficiency of optimal-transport-based verification methods from draft and target features, enabling context-dependent expansion decisions. Our neural selector allows OT-based methods like SpecInfer to outperform Traversal Verification for the first time, achieving 5% higher average throughput across a wide range of models, datasets, and sampling settings.
Rahul Thomas, Teo Kitanovski, Micah Goldblum +1
Ritual · Columbia University · Vanderbilt University