about
Trees to Flows and Back: Unifying Decision Trees and Diffusion Models (arxiv.org)
54 points by rsn243 119 days ago | hide | past | pdf | 11 comments on HN

In plain words: Decision trees and diffusion models are the same process in the right limits, sharing one training rule that gradient boosting follows almost perfectly. A generator built on this idea makes tabular data as faithfully as the usual approach but twice as fast.

Abstract

Decision trees and diffusion models are ostensibly disparate model classes, one discrete and hierarchical, the other continuous and dynamic. This work unifies the two by establishing a crisp mathematical correspondence between hierarchical decision trees and diffusion processes in appropriate limiting regimes. Our unification reveals a shared optimization principle: \emph{Global Trajectory Score Matching (GTSM)}, for which gradient boosting (in an idealized version) is asymptotically optimal. We underscore the conceptual value of our work through two key practical instantiations: \treeflow, which achieves competitive generation quality on tabular data with higher fidelity and a 2\times computational speedup, and \dsmtree, a novel distillation method that transfers hierarchical decision logic into neural networks, matching teacher performance within 2\% on many benchmarks.

Sai Niranjan Ramachandran, Suvrit Sra
arXiv:2605.00414 · cs.LG, cond-mat.stat-mech, cs.AI · submitted May 1, 2026 · updated May 21, 2026
abstract · pdf · html · 12 pages (main), 68 pages (inclusive of appendix), Accepted in the Forty-Third International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) 2026

add comment on HN

Apologies if I didn't understand the paper, but why do you want to apply diffusion models to tabular datasets in the first place?

Do we think they'll be better than decision trees? Is there some tabular problem that can be handled by diffusion but not trees?

First, they give a novel generation algorithm based on combining trees with diffusion, which trees alone just don't give you.

Second, yes, they think some tabular data will be fit better by their combination of trees with diffusion than just with trees.

You might not want to make a sword out of iron if steel is available, but understanding the relationship between iron and steel is broadly valuable.
I can see the mathematical results are interesting, I was more wondering if there was a practical utility to this TreeFlow thing they built.
this lacks the math for any bold claims
Did you read the paper? Is there something specifically you're missing? A proof? A theorem statement?
this is an empirical engineering paper with theoretical dressing, it would not need to be a theorem paper of course.
Is the code available somewhere?
Decision trees and diffusion models are ostensibly disparate model classes, one discrete and hierarchical, the other continuous and dynamic. This work unifies the two by establishing a crisp mathematical correspondence between hierarchical decision trees and diffusion processes in appropriate limiting regimes. Our unification reveals a shared optimization principle: \emph{Global Trajectory Score Matching (GTSM)}, for which gradient boosting (in an idealized version) is asymptotically optimal. We underscore the conceptual value of our work through two key practical instantiations: \treeflow, which achieves competitive generation quality on tabular data with higher fidelity and a 2\times computational speedup, and \dsmtree, a novel distillation method that transfers hierarchical decision logic into neural networks, matching teacher performance within 2\% on many benchmarks.
You could at least fix the latex commands when copy pasting the abstract. ;-)
Figure 1 definitely cleared up any misunderstandings I had about the paper