Background
Continuous diffusion language models (CDLMs) and speculative drafters offer efficient language generation but are typically evaluated differently: CDLMs generate independently through iterative refinement, whereas drafters propose text for target-model verification and correction.
Setup and Training
We compare their architectures without verification, using LangFlow for CDLMs and adapting DSpark's Markov and recurrent-head architectures for standalone generation. All models are trained from scratch for unconditional, single-block OpenWebText generation at lengths 16, 128, and 1024, without target features or verification, using common preprocessing, backbone dimensions, and training-update budgets.
Evaluation Metrics
We evaluate generation perplexity (GenPPL) with an external language model and distributional similarity to reference text with MAUVE.
Key Findings
With default denoising steps equal to sequence length, LangFlow outperforms both DSpark variants on both metrics at lengths 128 and 1024, while DSpark-RNN leads at 16.
A conditional KL analysis characterizes dependencies excluded by the Markov head's previous-token conditioning.
Recurrent memory removes this restriction and improves both metrics, but the longer-sequence gap persists.
Teacher probability matching further lowers Markov GenPPL without observed MAUVE gains.
Increasing LangFlow's denoising steps at fixed weights improves both metrics at lengths 16 and 128, changing the length-128 ordering relative to DSpark-RNN.
Conclusion
These results establish LangFlow's longer-sequence advantage under the evaluated budgets and highlight iterative full-sequence refinement as a route to improving standalone generation beyond gains from recurrent head memory.