Cola2 Cola2

Cola2: Co-Adaptive Hierarchical Language Modeling with Continuous Semantic Compression and Balanced Discrete Generation

Compress semantics continuously, realize language discretely, and let both sides co-adapt.

Hongcan Guo1,2,‡, Yian Zhao2,3, Feng Wang2, Shen Nie4, Guoqiang Wei2,‡, Yan Zeng2,†,‡, Hengshuang Zhao1,✉
1The University of Hong Kong 2ByteDance Seed 3Peking University 4Renmin University of China
†Project Lead ·  ‡Major Contributor ·  ✉Corresponding author
Seedance Team Research Project
Cola2 project overview.
Abstract

Co-adapting continuous semantics and discrete generation

Hierarchical language generation separates continuous semantic modeling from discrete text realization, but its effectiveness depends on what information the latent space should compress and how the discrete generator should use it. We propose Cola2, which jointly studies continuous semantic compression, the discrete reconstruction–generation balance, and their co-adaptation. Cola2 dynamically segments text into semantic spans, controls the compression rate with an auxiliary-loss-free negative-feedback mechanism, and combines reconstruction and generation supervision to learn compact and predictive latent representations.

A block-causal masked diffusion model (MDM) decoder is jointly trained under clean, noisy, and dropped latent conditions, and classifier-free guidance (CFG) adjusts the balance between semantic reconstruction and autonomous generation. During training, token-prediction gradients update the encoder through the latents, driving the continuous representation and discrete generation to co-adapt, while Flow Matching prior learning is decoupled from representation learning via stop-gradient. At inference, the generated text is re-encoded under the fixed span layout, keeping the latent history consistent with the actual text context.

Systematic component analyses and controlled comparisons on five downstream tasks with about 210B training tokens validate the core designs and show competitive, unsaturated scaling. With only 346.03B source tokens, the unconverged checkpoint reaches a 60.10 eight-task average and surpasses Llama-3-8B on HellaSwag and StoryCloze despite its over 43× larger reported pretraining budget.

These results indicate effective transfer of the Qwen-initialized causal decoder's generation capability and substantial scaling headroom for hierarchical language generation. More broadly, continuous-latent hierarchical modeling can combine effectively with established token-space generation paradigms, including autoregressive and masked-diffusion decoders.

Method

The Cola2 workflow

A compressed continuous latent prior organizes semantics; a capable token-space decoder reconstructs those semantics and generates the remaining detail.

Cola2 method overview: compression VAE, balanced discrete decoder, detached latent DiT training, and block-wise inference.
Method overview from the paper. Stage 1 jointly trains the compression encoder and reconstruction–generation balanced decoder. Stage 2 additionally trains a DiT on detached latents. At inference, the DiT generates latents block by block and the decoder realizes them as tokens.
Stage 1

Semantic compression

Dynamic segmentation assigns latent positions to content-aware spans. A gradient-free controller keeps the mean compression rate near its target without competing with representation learning.

Stage 2

Detached latent prior

A block-causal DiT fits the online latent distribution with Flow Matching. Its gradient is stopped at the encoder, while token-side gradients continue to shape the representation.

Inference

Propose → decode → re-encode

The DiT proposes a latent block, the decoder realizes tokens, and fixed-span feedback re-encodes those tokens so latent and discrete histories remain aligned.

Experiments

Three questions across the hierarchy

We study how to construct a compressed semantic latent space, how to train its continuous generator, and how the discrete decoder should balance reconstruction with generation.

1 · How do we build a compressed, predictive semantic latent space?
Main finding. Dynamic semantic segmentation and generation-oriented supervision are both essential. At 2× compression, the best dynamic configuration reaches 29.4% on LAMBADA and slightly surpasses the uncompressed model; co-evolving the encoder and decoder with generative supervision reaches 58.2%.
Dynamic segmentation and rate-control comparison.
Segmentation and rate control. Content-aware spans beat fixed and random grouping; auxiliary-free feedback beats DLCM.
VAE encoder architecture and pooling ablations.
VAE architecture. Layer allocation matters more than depth; intra-span bidirectional attention is best.
Latent width and maximum span-length ablations.
Capacity. Latent width has an interior optimum and maximum span length is non-monotonic.
Span-length distributions.
Span distribution. Larger caps reduce forcibly truncated semantic spans.
Generative supervision ablations.
Generative supervision. Predictive objectives and encoder–decoder co-evolution are complementary.
2 · How should the continuous latent generator be trained?
Main finding. Keep adapting the VAE with token-side supervision, but detach the Flow Matching gradient from the encoder. A moderate latent block size is best, the noise schedule must match the representation, and inference saturates at roughly eight DiT steps.
VAE update policy and DiT noise-schedule results.
Update policy and calibration. Trainable VAE plus detached DiT gradient performs best; the schedule must match the latent.
DiT block size and model-capacity results.
Block size. Moderate blocks are optimal; larger DiTs tolerate broader blocks.
Latent generator CFG and inference-step sweeps.
Inference. Strong CFG helps and DiT denoising saturates at about eight steps.
3 · How should the decoder balance reconstruction and generation?
Main finding. The decoder should train mostly under noisy and dropped latent conditions while retaining clean reconstruction examples. The selected 0.4 / 0.4 / 0.2 drop–noise–clean mixture reaches 44.7%, and shuffled latents cause the largest degradation, confirming that the decoder uses aligned semantic content.
Decoder clean, noisy, and dropped condition mixture.
Data partition. A 0.4 / 0.4 / 0.2 drop–noise–clean mixture gives the best balance.
Decoder CFG and parameter-allocation results.
Guidance and allocation. CFG must match training; a 2B DiT with a 1B decoder is the best 3B split.
Decoder size scaling results.
Decoder size. Accuracy improves monotonically with decoder capacity under a fixed DiT.
Demasking steps and latent ablation.
Latent use. Eight-by-eight steps are optimal; shuffled latents cause the largest degradation.
4 · Do the gains continue as training scales?
Main finding. Under controlled training to approximately 210B tokens, Cola-MDM achieves the strongest overall scaling. Compressed Cola2-MDM converges more slowly, but continues closing its gap to LLaDA after about 150B tokens without saturation.
Controlled scaling trends for AR, LLaDA, Cola DLM, Cola-MDM, and Cola2-MDM.
Controlled scaling. Compression retains strong semantic-task scaling while the latent DiT continues to improve.
Optimal decoder CFG weight over the controlled scaling run.
Decoder CFG trend. The optimum remains near −0.9 and drifts gradually toward zero during training.
Post-pretraining evaluation

60.10 average at 346.03B source tokens

A separate resource-constrained run initializes the causal decoder from Qwen3-4B-Base. Its latent DiT remains unconverged, leaving substantial scaling headroom.

Training budget

346.03B source tokens

Stage I trains the VAE; Stage II co-trains the VAE and an approximately 4B latent DiT; Stage III continues the DiT.

Eight-task average

60.10 accuracy

Only 6.15 points behind Llama-3-8B despite that baseline reporting at least 15T pretraining tokens.

Data efficiency

>43× fewer tokens

Cola2 surpasses Llama-3-8B on HellaSwag and StoryCloze under the reported token budgets.

★ Eight-task benchmark

Competitive capability before convergence

The models below use different recipes, tokenizers, and token-counting conventions; this comparison contextualizes post-pretraining performance rather than isolating the generation paradigm.

Task Llama-3-8B Qwen2.5-7B Qwen3-8B-Base LLaDA-8B-Base Cola2
Pretraining tokens15T+18T~36T2.3T346B
RACE75.7789.9590.6587.4069.91
NarrativeQA42.7032.9037.3036.0032.70
HellaSwag39.2175.6768.1369.6541.75
StoryCloze79.4995.0997.4495.9480.42
LAMBADA75.7071.8271.2067.9063.00
ARC-Easy90.8696.0097.3593.8587.62
TruthfulQA63.0469.0372.5864.8754.10
MMLU63.1970.1672.3161.2751.32
8-task average66.2575.0875.8772.1160.10
Experiments

Summary

The results support the design of Cola2 in three respects.

Semantic compression: dynamic segmentation and generative supervision keep the latents strongly semantic at high compression rates; the former slightly surpasses the uncompressed model with an appropriate Lmax, and the latter raises accuracy from 15.7% to 26.7%.

Reconstruction–generation balance: mixed training dominated by noisy and dropped conditions enables the decoder both to faithfully use the latent (shuffling the latent costs 12.2 points) and to autonomously generate the residual information.

Continuous–discrete co-adaptation: the information placed in the latent should be determined by the decoder; co-training the encoder and decoder yields a 5.9-point gain, and both continue to benefit from more training data, giving the hierarchical model scaling trends comparable to or better than AR and LLaDA.

Outlook

Limitations & Future Prospects

Although our results provide initial evidence for the feasibility, competitiveness, and scaling potential of Cola2, we view the current system as a starting point rather than a finished endpoint.

First, the model remains far from convergence, especially the latent DiT, while the present training scale is limited by available resources. Larger models, longer training, and broader data and compute budgets are therefore needed to establish its performance ceiling.

Second, compression reduces the dominant linear and attention FLOPs of the latent prior in theory, but end-to-end generation speed also depends on the decoder, CFG branches, latent feedback, and hardware utilization. Infrastructure co-design—including specialized kernels, cache management, and parallel scheduling—is needed to translate theoretical savings into practical speedups.

Third, Cola2 already shows compatibility with autoregressive and masked-diffusion decoders, but their co-training objectives, inference trade-offs, and optimal division of labor remain underexplored.

Finally, the continuous latent space may provide a shared interface between text and other continuous modalities such as vision, opening a path toward unified latent representations, cross-modal priors, and unified understanding and generation.

Cite

BibTeX

The final paper identifier will be added when available.

@article{guo2026cola2,
  title  = {Cola2: Co-Adaptive Hierarchical Language Modeling
            with Continuous Semantic Compression and
            Balanced Discrete Generation},
  author = {Guo, Hongcan and Zhao, Yian and Wang, Feng and Nie, Shen
            and Wei, Guoqiang and Zeng, Yan and Zhao, Hengshuang},
  year   = {2026},
  note   = {Paper link forthcoming}
}