Masked diffusion language models repeatedly compute representations for unresolved tokens, but conventional denoisers do not explicitly retain these representations for reuse across steps. We introduce Temporal Self-Conditioning Diffusion Language Model (TDLM), which lets each unresolved position attend to its own history of hidden representations within a frozen denoiser. This gives later predictions access to computation already performed. Training uses self-generated trajectories and a simple cross-entropy objective for tokens revealed between consecutively sampled decoding steps, while causal temporal attention permits parallel evaluation during training. On LLaDA, the temporal modules add only approximately 0.84% trainable parameters. Across LLaDA and Dream, the main comparison shows up to 7.15× faster generation than the corresponding original diffusion language model, with competitive answer quality on the evaluated tasks. These results motivate temporal memory as a practical way to make more effective use of repeated denoising computation.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Accuracy–latency trade-off on GSM8K. Threshold sweeps compare TDLM with the evaluated baselines.
Figure 2: Reusing computation before commitment. Each column is a denoising evaluation, read from bottom to top. The bottom shows the partially revealed input; the top shows token predictions before commitment. Decoding Steps 1–3 use inputs S0,S1,S2 at s0=0,s1=1,s2=2 , respectively. The green position remains masked while its predictions can change. Green arrows retrieve earlier hidden representations at that position and layer. Yellow modules are trainable, and the backbone is frozen.
Figure 3: Sampled inputs and their training targets. The top row gives the teacher’s reveal step for each token position. The three input rows are S1,S2,S3 at steps s1=2,s2=4,s3=6 . Gray positions are revealed context. Green positions are masked inputs whose teacher tokens become visible in the next selected sequence and are used as CE targets. Red positions are also masked, but receive no loss on that input. Arrows show reuse of earlier hidden representations at the same position and layer.
LLaDA-8B-Instruct
Dream-v0-Instruct-7B
Dataset
Model
ACC (%) ↑
NFE
Sec. ↓
Speedup
ACC (%) ↑
NFE
Sec. ↓
Speedup
MATH-500
TDLM
37.20
54.79
0.829
4.26 ×
44.20
74.62
1.194
3.05 ×
Fast-dLLM
38.60
107.20
1.535
2.30 ×
44.00
113.50
1.646
2.21 ×
MetaState
36.80
107.56
1.682
2.10 ×
40.80 †
115.88
1.671
2.18 ×
CDLM
30.40
87.89
2.851
1.24 ×
26.00
96.93
1.438
2.53 ×
d3LLM
31.80
35.67
1.244
2.84 ×
42.40
53.76
0.820
4.45 ×
Table 1: Main results on two backbones. ACC is mathematical accuracy or code pass@1; NFE and seconds are per-problem means. Speedup is relative to the original model of the same backbone on the same task. Gold , silver , and bronze mark the three best distinct displayed values within each backbone–task group; ties share a rank. † : scoring-only tag removal for the Dream MetaState results is described in Appendix C .
Temporal context
Accuracy (%)
NFE
Sec.
GPU (GiB)
Current only (gated)
76.48
42.64
0.623
15.184
Last 1
77.62
44.06
0.637
15.188
Last 3
78.00
42.36
0.631
15.196
Last 5
78.68
41.57
0.601
15.204
Full history
79.08
40.08
0.585
15.330
Table 2: Restricting temporal context at inference. All conditions reuse the same trained LLaDA checkpoint without retraining. Current-only retains the Q/K/sink gate. GPU memory includes weights and compiled workspaces. Implementation details are in Appendix E .
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Method
Added trainable parameters
Training data
d3LLM [ 15 ]
335.54M (LoRA)
≈ 92k examples
CDLM [ 11 ]
176.13M (LoRA)
≈ 15k prompts; trajectories collected at two temperatures per prompt
MetaState [ 18 ]
51.08M
15,543 instruction–response examples
TDLM
67.11M
3,500 self-generated trajectories
Appendix
Table 3: Added trainable parameters and training-data scale for LLaDA-based models. M denotes one million parameters.
Temporal layers
Accuracy (%)
NFE
Avg. sec
8, dispersed
77.86
40.15
0.571
16, middle
79.00
45.72
0.683
16, dispersed (main)
79.08
40.08
0.585
32, all
Training OOM
Appendix
Table 4: Different temporal-layer allocations on GSM8K. Every temporal module uses four heads of width 64; measured models share the 750-update training recipe.
Heads × head width
Total width
Updates
Accuracy (%)
NFE
Avg. sec
1×64
64
500
76.35
47.34
0.682
1×128
128
500
77.71
47.66
0.701
2×128
256
750
78.47
45.84
0.688
4×64
256
750
79.00
45.72
0.683
Appendix
Table 5: Temporal-width and head configurations on GSM8K. All models augment the middle sixteen backbone layers (zero-based indices 8–23). Total width is the product of head count and head width. Training-recipe differences are described in the text.
Dataset
Model
ACC (%) ↑
NFE
Sec. ↓
Speedup
MATH-500
TDLM
36.00
32.60
0.366
3.50 ×
Fast-dLLM
36.40
64.28
0.670
1.91 ×
MetaState
35.80
65.14
0.742
1.72 ×
CDLM
30.80
46.36
1.806
0.71 ×
d3LLM
31.40
42.96
0.947
1.35 ×
Original DLM
36.00
128.00
1.281
1.00 ×
Appendix
Table 6: LLaDA with a 128-token generation budget and block size 32. ACC is mathematical accuracy or code pass@1. Speedup is relative to original DLM on the same task at this budget. Medal colors and ties follow Table 1 . Values and speedup ratios are reported at the supplied precision.
Dataset
Model
ACC (%) ↑
NFE
Sec. ↓
Speedup
MATH-500
TDLM
42.80
70.83
1.389
4.81 ×
Fast-dLLM
41.60
134.01
2.443
2.73 ×
MetaState
41.20
135.23
2.599
2.57 ×
CDLM
31.00
91.48
3.569
1.87 ×
d3LLM
35.80
42.06
1.618
4.12 ×
Original DLM
43.20
384.00
6.675
1.00 ×
Appendix
Table 7: LLaDA with a 384-token generation budget and block size 32. ACC is mathematical accuracy or code pass@1. Speedup is relative to original DLM on the same task at this budget. Medal colors and ties follow Table 1 . Values and speedup ratios are reported at the supplied precision.
Diffusion language models intrinsically fail to capture correlations between decoded tokens, which leads to a harsh trade-off between sampling quality and throughput. To solve this issue, we propose DiLaDiff, a variant of masked diffusion language models with three components: (1) a continuous latent space with semantic capabilities, learned by an auto-encoder fine-tuned from an existing masked diffusion language model; (2) a latent diffusion model learning the prior over the encoder distribution; (3) a consistency model distilling the learned prior into a few-step latent generative model. We show that, even without distillation, our latent-guided diffusion model outperforms the masked diffusion baseline while significantly accelerating inference. Consistency distillation further lowers the computational overhead of continuous diffusion, such that the latent is generated in negligible time compared to discrete decoding.
Jean-Marie Lemercier, Tomas Geffner, Karsten Kreis +3
Masked diffusion language models (MDLMs) re-predict every position at each denoising step, but standard samplers commit tokens once revealed, leaving this revision capability unused. Existing approaches either add heuristic or learned mechanisms to revise committed tokens, or remask them back to [MASK] before re-predicting; a principled sampler that directly revises visible tokens without auxiliary modules remains underexplored. We introduce D3IM, a parameter-free sampler derived as a corrector-style reverse update that permits direct visible-to-visible revision without additional modules or auxiliary passes. D3IM also reveals a model-side obstacle we term preservation bias: the model tends to reproduce its own wrong committed tokens rather than correct them. We address this with SCOPE (Self-Conditioned On Prediction Errors), a lightweight post-training procedure that simulates D3IM's sampling process. On LLaDA-8B at 64 denoising steps, SCOPE+D3IM improves over the original LLaDA-8B with standard unmasking by +13.0 on GSM8K (68.3%), +4.8 on MATH-500 (23.6%), +15.3 on HumanEval (29.3%), and +10.4 on MBPP (30.8%), with gains that increase as more denoising steps are used on math and HumanEval.
Diffusion language models (DLMs) enable fast generation by predicting multiple tokens in parallel, but their practical adoption remains limited by a persistent quality gap relative to comparably sized autoregressive (AR) models. We attribute this gap to a computation-difficulty mismatch: within a partially observed sequence, some unknown tokens are easy to predict, while others require substantially more computation. Existing DLMs nevertheless apply uniform computational depth to all unknown positions at each denoising step. We introduce ALoDLM, which replaces uniform computation with token-adaptive latent recurrence. At each denoising step, ALoDLM iteratively refines latent representations and allocates computation according to token difficulty. Tokens ready to commit are fed back as discrete context, while unresolved tokens retain and further refine their latent states through additional recurrent passes. To learn token prediction and computation allocation jointly, we formulate token-wise computation schedules as latent variables and derive a conditional negative evidence lower bound (NELBO). We train ALoDLM at 1.7B and 8B parameter scales. Across eleven benchmarks, ALoDLM outperforms all evaluated DLMs and the corresponding AR baselines in average benchmark score at both scales. ALoDLM also retains fast parallel decoding, yielding a strong quality-efficiency trade-off among evaluated autoregressive and diffusion models under optimized inference engines.
Liancheng Fang, Zhuowei Li, Youngeun Kim +10
University of Illinois Chicago · Amazon AGI · Korea University