Vision-Language Models (VLMs) and Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models process hundreds of visual tokens, making visual representations a major computational bottleneck. We argue that visual token pruning should be formulated not as identifying individually important tokens, but as preserving the dominant low-rank spectral structure of the visual representation. Based on this formulation, we introduce SVD-Prune, a training-free framework that leverages Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) and statistical leverage scores for globally informed token selection. SVD-Prune is architecture-agnostic and can be applied at different stages of the multimodal pipeline, including encoder-side, decoder-side, and hybrid configurations Extensive experiments across VLM and VLA benchmarks demonstrate strong robustness under extreme compression. SVD-Prune reduces the visual token. SVD-Prune cuts the visual token budget by up to 99.3%, while, at a 16-token budget, encoder-side pruning lowers inference FLOPs by 82.4% and achieves a 4.18x end-to-end speedup, including pruning overhead.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of SVD-Prune. Visual representations are decomposed using SVD to identify a dominant spectral subspace, and tokens are ranked using statistical leverage scores to retain a compact representative subset. N denotes the number of tokens, d the feature dimension, and m the truncation rank.
Methods
Location
SQA [ 19 ]
VizWiz [ 7 ]
POPE [ 14 ]
GQA [ 9 ]
TextVQA [ 22 ]
MME [ 6 ]
Vanilla
–
70.43
50.00
86.96
61.90
58.20
1862.00
Retain 192 Tokens (33.3%)
FastV [ 5 ]
Decoder
69.10
50.80
64.80
52.88
52.50
1605.00
PDrop [ 26 ]
Decoder
70.02
51.10
82.30
57.30
56.50
1766.00
SparseVLM [ 31 ]
Decoder
69.10
52.90
83.60
57.60
56.10
1721.00
VisionZip [ 27 ]
Encoder
68.90
54.10
85.30
59.30
57.30
1782.60
Table 1: Response quality of LLaVA-1.5-7B with SVD-Prune across multimodal benchmarks and token budgets. Decoder-side pruning is applied after the 8th layer, while hybrid pruning first reduces visual tokens to 64 after the encoder, followed by a second pruning stage after the 8th decoder layer. Best and second-best results are marked in bold and underlined , respectively. Results marked with ∗ correspond to SVD-Prune applied after the 12th decoder layer.
Figure 2: Qualitative visualization of SVD-Prune on representative examples from MME (top), TextVQA (middle), and POPE (bottom). From left to right: input image with the associated prompt, token leverage-score heatmap, and encoder-side pruning results retaining 32, 16, 8, and 4 visual tokens, respectively. Green markers indicate the spatial locations of the selected tokens.
Method
Location
Latency
FPS
FLOPs
[ms]
[T]
Vanilla
–
930.00
1.06
3.450
FastV [ 5 ]
Decoder
332.14
3.01
1.232
SparseVLM [ 31 ]
Decoder
372.00
2.69
1.380
VisionZip [ 27 ]
Encoder
184.52
5.42
0.604
SVD-Prune (ours)
Encoder
222.56
4.33
0.606
Table 2: Performance comparison on an RTX 3080 16GB GPU. All pruning methods are evaluated using the same final visual token budget of 16 tokens; the vanilla model uses its original 576 visual tokens.
Component
Pruning Location
Encoder
Decoder
Hybrid
Latency [ms]
Encoder
22.88
22.88
22.88
SVD-Prune overhead
SVD
23.94
43.50
23.94 + 5.45
Leverage Scoring
0.53
0.53
0.53 + 0.15
Table 3: Latency breakdown and computational overhead of different SVD-Prune deployment modes with a 16-token budget. Decoder-side pruning is applied after LLM layer 8 in both the decoder and hybrid modes. For the hybrid mode, latency and FLOPs are reported as encoder-side + decoder-side SVD-Prune costs.
Method
# Tokens
TextVQA
SQA
MME
Vanilla
1024
63.44
58.37
1702.84
SVD-Prune (ours)
900
62.84
57.37
1716.38
784
61.80
58.94
1679.76
484
53.46
59.61
1650.04
256
37.88
57.14
1624.31
Table 4: Performance of QwenVL with encoder-side SVD-Prune across different visual token budgets.
Tokens
LIBERO-Spatial
LIBERO-Goal
LIBERO-Object
LIBERO-10
SR (%)
GFLOPs
Lat. (ms)
SR (%)
GFLOPs
Lat. (ms)
SR (%)
GFLOPs
Lat. (ms)
SR (%)
GFLOPs
Lat. (ms)
256
78.0
4376.05
1099.60
75.2
4213.82
1015.32
72.4
4254.36
1436.51
55.8
4294.92
3213.72
192
79.0
3935.92
1044.56
78.4
3774.09
1014.45
71.6
3814.53
1441.28
54.6
3854.89
2922.52
128
80.8
3075.68
982.76
76.8
3336.51
983.44
73.0
3376.85
1399.32
51.8
3417.31
2631.32
56
79.6
2349.89
900.96
79.6
2846.80
988.74
71.0
2887.03
988.13
47.0
2927.27
2304.10
Table 5: Task success rate and inference efficiency of OpenVLA with SVD-Prune on LIBERO-Spatial, LIBERO-Goal, LIBERO-Object, and LIBERO-10. Each suite comprises 10 tasks with 50 trials per task. Decoder-side pruning is applied after the 16th decoder layer.
Figure 3: Qualitative visualization of SVD-Prune on LIBERO-Spatial (top) and LIBERO-Object (bottom), at selected frame indices. Input frames and corresponding decoder-side pruning results retaining 56 visual tokens are shown, with frame numbers indicated below each example.
GQA [ 9 ]
POPE [ 14 ]
MME [ 6 ]
ε
192
16
192
16
192
16
0.10
38.30
38.30
50.53
48.93
1123.71
1151.58
0.70
40.61
38.67
52.22
52.80
1150.03
1167.41
0.75
45.95
40.87
86.30
71.91
1579.33
1283.55
0.80
59.88
52.80
87.75
72.68
1788.00
1364.13
0.85
59.90
52.86
87.76
72.77
1789.01
1364.24
Table 6: Effect of the spectral energy retention threshold ε on the performance of LLaVA-1.5-7B across multiple benchmarks and token budgets.
Scoring function
TextVQA
POPE
MME
Energy-weighted
42.07
76.16
1204.48
Whitening-based
42.00
83.16
1536.33
AVI
53.23
83.68
1539.07
Leverage
55.14
83.87
1575.00
Table 7: Ablation of token scoring functions on LLaVA-1.5-7B with encoder-side pruning and a fixed budget of 64 visual tokens.
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have revolutionized multi-modal learning by jointly processing visual and textual information. Yet, they face significant challenges due to the high computational and memory demands of processing long sequences of vision tokens. Many existing methods rely on local heuristics, such as attention scores or token norms. However, these criteria suffer from positional bias and information dispersion, limiting their ability to preserve essential content at high pruning ratios and leading to performance degradation on visually detailed images. To address these issues, we propose SVD-Prune, a training-free, plug-and-play token pruning method based on Singular Value Decomposition. It decomposes the vision token feature matrix and selects the top-k tokens using statistical leverage scores, ensuring only tokens contributing most to the dominant global variance are preserved. Experiments show that SVD-Prune consistently outperforms prior pruning methods under extreme vision token budgets, maintaining strong performance even with 32 and 16 vision tokens.
Yvon Apedo, Martyna Poreba, Michal Szczepanski +1
Universit´e Paris-Saclay, Univ Evry, IBISC, 91020, Evry-Courcouronnes, France · Universit´e Paris-Saclay, CEA, List, F-91120, Palaiseau, France
Vision-language models (VLMs) face significant computational inefficiencies caused by excessive generation of visual tokens. While prior work shows that a large fraction of visual tokens are redundant, existing compression methods struggle to balance importance preservation and information diversity. To address this, we propose PruneSID, a training-free Synergistic Importance-Diversity approach featuring a two-stage pipeline: (1) Principal Semantic Components Analysis (PSCA) for clustering tokens into semantically coherent groups, ensuring comprehensive concept coverage, and (2) Intra-group Non-Maximum Suppression (NMS) for pruning redundant tokens while preserving key representative tokens within each group. Additionally, PruneSID incorporates an information-aware dynamic compression ratio mechanism that optimizes token compression rates based on image complexity, enabling more effective average information preservation across diverse scenes. Extensive experiments demonstrate state-of-the-art performance, achieving 96.3% accuracy on LLaVA-1.5 with only 11.1% token retention, and 92.8% accuracy at extreme compression rates (5.6%) on LLaVA-NeXT, outperforming prior methods by 2.5% with 7.8 × faster prefilling speed compared to the original model. Our framework generalizes across diverse VLMs and both image and video modalities, showcasing strong cross-modal versatility. Code is available at https://github.com/ZhengyaoFang/PruneSID.
Zhengyao Fang, Pengyuan Lyu, Chengquan Zhang +3
Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen · Independent Researcher · Peng Cheng Laboratory
Visual token pruning is a promising approach to reducing the inference cost of large vision-language models (LVLMs), yet aggressive token reduction often causes substantial performance degradation. We identify three key factors behind this degradation: text-guided selection bias, information loss from discarded tokens, and positional distortion caused by sequence compaction. Based on these observations, we propose VPRune, a training-free pre-LLM pruning framework consisting of visual-only diversity selection, similarity-guided token recycling, and position-preserving restoration. Experiments on FastVLM-1.5B across multiple vision-language benchmarks demonstrate that VPRune achieves a favorable accuracy--compression trade-off, with particularly pronounced advantages under aggressive compression. Furthermore, evaluations on edge-device show that VPRune effectively reduces end-to-end inference latency while maintaining superior task performance, demonstrating its practicality for resource-constrained LVLM deployment.
Guangchuan Lv, Dianxing Shi, Dingjie Fu
Northeastern University · Beihang University · Huazhong University of Science and Technology