Paper Reading AI Learner

Seeing What Matters, Verifying What Pays: Load-Adaptive Speculative Decoding for Vision-Language Models

2026-11-06 09:31:14
Hong Nie, Zhangchi Gao, Yuqian Liang, Jun Yu, Bo Wang, Jianqing Sun, Shengping Liu

Abstract

Speculative decoding accelerates vision-language model (VLM) inference without altering the output distribution, yet two factors limit its gains. Existing drafters either lack the image evidence required for visually grounded tokens or pay to condition on every visual token, although a short draft block typically depends on only a few image regions. Moreover, the value of verifying additional candidates varies with GPU load, so no fixed verification structure is efficient across serving conditions. We present Uni-LaSpec, a block-parallel speculative decoding framework that addresses both factors. To improve draft quality, Uni-LaSpec reuses the verifier's own attention: the query retained from the preceding verification ranks the cached, int8-quantized visual keys, and a cross-layer vote selects a few visual tokens that the drafter fuses through gated cross-attention. Acceptance-aware training further weights each draft position by its contribution to the accepted prefix. To allocate verification, a marginal-cost criterion selects the structure per request and per round: draft trees exploit idle verifier capacity under light load, whereas a dynamic head truncates linear drafts under heavy load. Across six VLMs from three model families and 17 text and multimodal benchmarks, selecting eight visual tokens retains at least 98.6% of the acceptance obtained from the full image at sub-millisecond selection cost. With greedy decoding at concurrency one, Uni-LaSpec achieves up to 5.11x text and 3.24x multimodal throughput over autoregressive decoding. Across six load levels and three GPU types, it outperforms autoregressive decoding in every setting and matches or exceeds the best fixed verification strategy in 123 of 144 settings; under bursty arrivals, it reduces mean end-to-end latency by 47.6% relative to linear verification.

Abstract (translated)

URL

https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.01617

PDF

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2611.01617.pdf


Tags
3D Action Action_Localization Action_Recognition Activity Adversarial Agent Attention Autonomous Bert Boundary_Detection Caption Chat Classification CNN Compressive_Sensing Contour Contrastive_Learning Deep_Learning Denoising Detection Dialog Diffusion Drone Dynamic_Memory_Network Edge_Detection Embedding Embodied Emotion Enhancement Face Face_Detection Face_Recognition Facial_Landmark Few-Shot Gait_Recognition GAN Gaze_Estimation Gesture Gradient_Descent Handwriting Human_Parsing Image_Caption Image_Classification Image_Compression Image_Enhancement Image_Generation Image_Matting Image_Retrieval Inference Inpainting Intelligent_Chip Knowledge Knowledge_Graph Language_Model LLM Matching Medical Memory_Networks Multi_Modal Multi_Task NAS NMT Object_Detection Object_Tracking OCR Ontology Optical_Character Optical_Flow Optimization Person_Re-identification Point_Cloud Portrait_Generation Pose Pose_Estimation Prediction QA Quantitative Quantitative_Finance Quantization Re-identification Recognition Recommendation Reconstruction Regularization Reinforcement_Learning Relation Relation_Extraction Represenation Represenation_Learning Restoration Review RNN Robot Salient Scene_Classification Scene_Generation Scene_Parsing Scene_Text Segmentation Self-Supervised Semantic_Instance_Segmentation Semantic_Segmentation Semi_Global Semi_Supervised Sence_graph Sentiment Sentiment_Classification Sketch SLAM Sparse Speech Speech_Recognition Style_Transfer Summarization Super_Resolution Surveillance Survey Text_Classification Text_Generation Time_Series Tracking Transfer_Learning Transformer Unsupervised Video_Caption Video_Classification Video_Indexing Video_Prediction Video_Retrieval Visual_Relation VQA Weakly_Supervised Zero-Shot