# Representation Dynamics Reveal Semantic Saliency and Similarity for Visual Token Pruning in MLLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.36916 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36916/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Visual token pruning and efficiency, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 5 of its 45 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [Visual token pruning and efficiency](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/visual-token-pruning-and-efficiency/)
- Efficient LLM inference and serving / [Visual token pruning in multimodal models](https://mlsanity.com/inference/visual-token-pruning-in-multimodal-models/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Qwen2.5-VL Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13923/) (2025)
- [Token Merging: Your ViT But Faster](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09461/) (2022)
- [SEED-Bench: Benchmarking Multimodal LLMs with Generative Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16125/) (2023)
- [EvoCut: Multi-Layer Evolution-Aware Visual Token Compression for Efficient Large Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.01756/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) incur high inference latency from long visual token sequences. Existing pruning methods commonly use attention maps or output features to estimate token importance or redundancy. Several recent approaches also exploit representation changes, but when and how these changes reflect foreground saliency and semantic consistency remain insufficiently understood. We analyze visual token representation dynamics across encoder depth and uncover two findings. First, the relationship between token update magnitudes and foreground saliency is layer-dependent: large token updates concentrate on foreground regions in two depth intervals, separated by several sink-dominated layers at intermediate depths. Second, similarities between token update directions better distinguish same-class from different-class tokens than those between encoder output features. Building on these findings, we propose MSDG-Prune, a training-free method that uses update magnitudes and directions to preserve salient and diverse visual information. Specifically, we group tokens by update-direction similarity and use query-weighted saliency derived from update magnitudes across a chosen depth window for group-wise token pruning. Extensive experiments across four MLLMs demonstrate the effectiveness and generalizability of MSDG-Prune. On LLaVA-NeXT, it retains 91.9% of uncompressed performance on average with only 5.6% of visual tokens, while achieving a 7.8x prefilling speedup. Code is available at https://github.com/liweixuan-hitsz/MSDG-Prune.