Abstract
Autoregressive (AR) video diffusion models have shown great potential in real-time video generation. Recent methods distill pretrained bidirectional video diffusion models into causal AR students through Distribution Matching Distillation (DMD), but the generated videos often suffer from over-saturation and over-smoothing issues, resulting in limited visual quality and realism. The key contributing factor is the mode-seeking behavior of the reverse KL objective in DMD, which can cause the student distribution to collapse onto only a few modes of the teacher distribution. To address this, we propose Mask Forcing, a Dual-Noise Masking Rollout strategy that perturbs the AR student self-rollout to alleviate the mode-seeking behavior. The core idea is to inject cleaner signals into noisy rollout inputs via random masks along spatial and temporal axes during the self-rollout process of AR diffusion distillation. Such perturbations encourage the student rollouts to explore more regions of the teacher distribution, allowing DMD to provide learning signals beyond the modes already covered by the student. Moreover, the cleaner tokens act as denoising guidance for other noisier tokens, improving the intermediate rollout predictions and reducing error accumulation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method improves multiple AR video diffusion distillation methods with higher visual quality efficiently, without incorporating real video data or additional post-training stages.
Method
Mask Forcing perturbs the student rollout trajectory through dual-noise masking, encouraging broader teacher-mode coverage while providing cleaner context for denoising noisy tokens.
Mask Forcing acts during the self-rollout DMD training stage, and requires no changes to the model architecture, the teacher, or the inference procedure. It can therefore be integrated into existing AR distillation pipelines in both chunk-wise and frame-wise settings.
Convergence Speed
Evaluation curves over the first 2000 distillation steps for three AR distillation baselines. In every panel the blue curve is the baseline and the red curve is the same baseline + Mask Forcing.
Qualitative Comparisons
Side-by-side comparisons against three AR distillation baselines. In every clip the left half is the baseline and the right half is the same baseline + Mask Forcing.
Single-Prompt Long Video
We integrate Mask Forcing into both the initialization and the streaming long-video tuning stages of LongLive, and evaluate 30-second generation. In every clip the left half is LongLive and the right half is LongLive + Mask Forcing.
Quantitative Results
Across both chunk-wise and frame-wise settings, Mask Forcing brings consistent gains in visual quality (HPSv3, Vision.) and instruction following (Instruct.), along with improvements on the VBench metrics.
Table 1 · 100-Prompt Set and VBench, chunk-wise and frame-wise settings
| Method | HPSv3 ↑ | Vision. ↑ | Instruct. ↑ | MQ ↑ | Dynamic. ↑ | Total ↑ | Quality ↑ | Semantic ↑ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chunk-wise | ||||||||
| Self Forcing | 9.55 | 10.10 | 38.50 | 15.88 | 70 | 81.89 | 82.99 | 77.49 |
| + Ours | 9.84+.29 | 11.37+1.27 | 45.03+6.53 | 20.49+4.61 | 82+12 | 82.61+.72 | 83.68+.69 | 78.74+1.25 |
| Causal Forcing | 9.37 | 10.36 | 40.41 | 17.73 | 76 | 82.67 | 83.58 | 78.98 |
| + Ours | 10.17+.80 | 11.58+1.22 | 46.30+5.89 | 21.54+3.81 | 82+6 | 82.76+.09 | 83.69+.11 | 79.01+.03 |
| LongLive | 9.11 | 10.77 | 42.48 | 21.20 | 76 | 82.02 | 82.87 | 78.66 |
| + Ours | 10.14+1.03 | 11.00+.23 | 42.65+.17 | 22.34+1.14 | 69−7 | 82.75+.73 | 83.71+.84 | 78.91+.25 |
| Frame-wise | ||||||||
| Self Forcing | 9.34 | 9.45 | 35.62 | 18.27 | 53 | 80.73 | 81.72 | 76.78 |
| + Ours | 9.79+.45 | 10.49+1.04 | 39.60+3.98 | 19.07+.80 | 61+8 | 81.49+.76 | 82.55+.83 | 77.23+.45 |
| Causal Forcing | 9.67 | 10.58 | 37.56 | 20.25 | 28 | 80.64 | 81.55 | 77.00 |
| + Ours | 9.96+.29 | 10.71+.13 | 39.60+2.04 | 23.69+3.44 | 52+24 | 82.28+1.64 | 83.19+1.64 | 78.62+1.62 |
| LongLive | 9.19 | 9.35 | 38.50 | 12.14 | 25 | 80.97 | 81.86 | 77.41 |
| + Ours | 9.46+.27 | 10.55+1.20 | 42.78+4.28 | 19.32+7.18 | 76+51 | 81.47+.50 | 82.33+.47 | 78.05+.64 |
Left block: 100-prompt set (HPSv3; VisionReward sub-scores Vision. / Instruct. / MQ; Dynamic Degree). Right block: VBench Total / Quality / Semantic. All metrics are scaled by 100 for readability except HPSv3.
Table 2 · Single-prompt 30s long video, MovieGen and VBench-Long
| Method | HPSv3 ↑ | Vision. ↑ | Instruct. ↑ | MQ ↑ | Dynamic. ↑ | Total ↑ | Quality ↑ | Semantic ↑ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LongLive | 8.44 | 14.31 | 62.04 | 18.84 | 70 | 83.91 | 84.71 | 80.70 |
| + Ours | 9.11+.67 | 14.93+.62 | 66.02+3.98 | 19.37+.53 | 64−6 | 84.51+.60 | 85.28+.57 | 81.44+.74 |
Ablation Studies
All ablations use the 100-prompt set with Self Forcing as the baseline. We report HPSv3 and Dynamic Degree jointly to expose the visual-quality / motion trade-off. Bold marks our default setting.
Table 3 · Mask ratio α
| α | HPSv3 ↑ | Dynamic. ↑ |
|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 10.00 | 47 |
| 0.2 | 9.84 | 82 |
| 0.3 | 9.82 | 65 |
| 0.4 | 10.15 | 57 |
| 0.5 | 10.17 | 44 |
Small ratios induce near-identical rollouts and weak motion. Large ratios lean too heavily on cleaner student predictions — top HPSv3, but dynamics collapse to 44. 0.2 perturbs enough to diversify trajectories while keeping the highest Dynamic Degree.
Table 4 · Timestep window Δ
| Δ | HPSv3 ↑ | Dynamic. ↑ |
|---|---|---|
| 50 | 9.16 | 92 |
| 150 | 9.82 | 70 |
| 250 | 9.84 | 82 |
| 450 | 9.98 | 80 |
| 600 | 9.90 | 67 |
The window controls how much cleaner the injected tokens are. 250 gives the best joint operating point between visual quality and motion dynamics.
Table 5 · Mask scheme
| Spatial, temporal | HPSv3 ↑ | Dynamic. ↑ |
|---|---|---|
| shared, per-rollout | 10.12 | 56 |
| shared, per-chunk | 9.84 | 81 |
| shared, per-step | 9.64 | 72 |
| per-frame, per-rollout | 10.03 | 53 |
| per-frame, per-chunk | 9.84 | 82 |
| per-frame, per-step | 9.93 | 74 |
Spatially, shared reuses one mask for all frames in a chunk while per-frame samples independently. Temporally, per-rollout fixes the mask for the whole rollout, per-chunk resamples per chunk, and per-step resamples at every denoising step. An effective scheme should diversify the student distribution enough to improve teacher-mode coverage without deviating from the teacher — per-frame + per-chunk hits that balance.