A Comparative analysis of Layer-wise Representational Capacity in AR and Diffusion LLMs
Raghavv Goel, Risheek Garrepalli, Sudhanshu Agrawal, Chris Lott, Mingu Lee, Fatih Porikli · Mar 8, 2026 · Citations: 0
How to use this page
Low trustUse this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.
Best use
Background context only
What to verify
Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.
Evidence quality
Low
Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.
Abstract
Autoregressive (AR) language models build representations incrementally via left-to-right prediction, while diffusion language models (dLLMs) are trained through full-sequence denoising. Although recent dLLMs match AR performance, whether diffusion objectives fundamentally reshape internal representations remains unclear. We perform the first layer- and token-wise representational analysis comparing native dLLMs (LLaDA), native AR models (Qwen2.5), and AR-initialized dLLMs (Dream-7B), using cosine similarity across layers and tokens alongside static inference-time layer-skipping as an analytical probe of redundancy. We find that diffusion objectives produce more global representations with substantial early-layer redundancy and reduced recency bias, while AR objectives yield tightly coupled, locally structured representations. AR-initialized dLLMs retain AR-like dynamics despite diffusion training, revealing persistent initialization bias. Leveraging this redundancy, native dLLMs absorb up to 18.75% FLOPs reduction while retaining over 90% performance on math-reasoning and coding benchmarks, whereas AR models collapse under identical skipping, revealing that diffusion objectives, rather than architecture alone, induce depth redundancy that enables principled compression.