standard diffusion
WavefrontDiffusion: Dynamic Decoding Schedule for Improved Reasoning
Yang, Haojin, Hu, Rui, Sun, Zequn, Zhou, Rui, Cai, Yujun, Wang, Yiwei
Diffusion Language Models (DLMs) have shown strong potential for text generation and are becoming a competitive alternative to autoregressive models. The denoising strategy plays an important role in determining the quality of their outputs. Mainstream denoising strategies include Standard Diffusion and BlockDiffusion. Standard Diffusion performs global denoising without restricting the update range, often finalizing incomplete context and causing premature end-of-sequence predictions. BlockDiffusion updates fixed-size blocks in a preset order, but its rigid structure can break apart coherent semantic units and disrupt reasoning. We present WavefrontDiffusion, a dynamic decoding approach that expands a wavefront of active tokens outward from finalized positions. This adaptive process follows the natural flow of semantic structure while keeping computational cost equal to block-based methods. Across four benchmarks in reasoning and code generation, WavefrontDiffusion achieves state-of-the-art performance while producing outputs with higher semantic fidelity, showing the value of adaptive scheduling for more coherent and efficient generation. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in complex reasoning and structured generation tasks such as mathematical problem solving and code synthesis (OpenAI et al., 2025; DeepSeek-AI et al., 2025). Autoregressive (AR) models remain the dominant paradigm for these tasks due to their stepwise logical consistency (Deletang et al., 2024). However, their strictly sequential nature introduces latency and limits flexibility, which can be problematic in settings that demand both accuracy and responsiveness, such as interactive assistants or real-time code generation. These limitations have motivated the exploration of alternative decoding paradigms that can balance quality, efficiency, and adaptability (Leviathan et al., 2023). Diffusion Language Models (DLMs) have recently emerged as a promising alternative by framing text generation as an iterative denoising process (Gong et al., 2025; Song et al., 2025).
- Asia > China > Jiangsu Province > Nanjing (0.04)
- Oceania > Australia > Queensland (0.04)
- North America > United States > California (0.04)
- (2 more...)
Generative Myopia: Why Diffusion Models Fail at Structure
Graph Diffusion Models (GDMs) optimize for statistical likelihood, implicitly acting as \textbf{frequency filters} that favor abundant substructures over spectrally critical ones. We term this phenomenon \textbf{Generative Myopia}. In combinatorial tasks like graph sparsification, this leads to the catastrophic removal of ``rare bridges,'' edges that are structurally mandatory ($R_{\text{eff}} \approx 1$) but statistically scarce. We prove theoretically and empirically that this failure is driven by \textbf{Gradient Starvation}: the optimization landscape itself suppresses rare structural signals, rendering them unlearnable regardless of model capacity. To resolve this, we introduce \textbf{Spectrally-Weighted Diffusion}, which re-aligns the variational objective using Effective Resistance. We demonstrate that spectral priors can be amortized into the training phase with zero inference overhead. Our method eliminates myopia, matching the performance of an optimal Spectral Oracle and achieving \textbf{100\% connectivity} on adversarial benchmarks where standard diffusion fails completely (0\%).
Multistep Consistency Models
Heek, Jonathan, Hoogeboom, Emiel, Salimans, Tim
Diffusion models are relatively easy to train but require many steps to generate samples. Consistency models are far more difficult to train, but generate samples in a single step. In this paper we propose Multistep Consistency Models: A unification between Consistency Models (Song et al., 2023) and TRACT (Berthelot et al., 2023) that can interpolate between a consistency model and a diffusion model: a trade-off between sampling speed and sampling quality. Specifically, a 1-step consistency model is a conventional consistency model whereas we show that a $\infty$-step consistency model is a diffusion model. Multistep Consistency Models work really well in practice. By increasing the sample budget from a single step to 2-8 steps, we can train models more easily that generate higher quality samples, while retaining much of the sampling speed benefits. Notable results are 1.4 FID on Imagenet 64 in 8 step and 2.1 FID on Imagenet128 in 8 steps with consistency distillation. We also show that our method scales to a text-to-image diffusion model, generating samples that are very close to the quality of the original model.
- Africa > Rwanda > Kigali > Kigali (0.04)
- Europe > Netherlands > North Holland > Amsterdam (0.04)
- Europe > Italy > Calabria > Catanzaro Province > Catanzaro (0.04)
- Europe > Austria (0.04)
Rolling Diffusion Models
Ruhe, David, Heek, Jonathan, Salimans, Tim, Hoogeboom, Emiel
Diffusion models have recently been increasingly applied to temporal data such as video, fluid mechanics simulations, or climate data. These methods generally treat subsequent frames equally regarding the amount of noise in the diffusion process. This paper explores Rolling Diffusion: a new approach that uses a sliding window denoising process. It ensures that the diffusion process progressively corrupts through time by assigning more noise to frames that appear later in a sequence, reflecting greater uncertainty about the future as the generation process unfolds. Empirically, we show that when the temporal dynamics are complex, Rolling Diffusion is superior to standard diffusion. In particular, this result is demonstrated in a video prediction task using the Kinetics-600 video dataset and in a chaotic fluid dynamics forecasting experiment.
- Europe > Netherlands > North Holland > Amsterdam (0.04)
- Europe > Italy > Calabria > Catanzaro Province > Catanzaro (0.04)
- North America > United States (0.04)
- Asia > Japan > Honshū > Tōhoku > Iwate Prefecture > Morioka (0.04)