arXiv:2606. 06448v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents are increasingly deployed on long-horizon tasks requiring sustained reasoning over extended interaction histories.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2606. 04315v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents accumulate histories that outgrow their context windows, motivating a growing literature on memory systems.
The paper introduces AMA, a framework that uses multiple agents—Constructor, Retriever, Judge, and Refresher—to manage memory for large language model agents. AMA’s hierarchical memory design dynamically adjusts retrieval granularity to match task complexity, while the Judge and Refresher ensure relevance, consistency, and timely updates. Experiments on long-context benchmarks show AMA outperforms existing baselines and cuts token usage by about 80% compared to full-context approaches.
arXiv:2605. 18421v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent benchmarks for Large Language Model (LLM) agents mainly evaluate reasoning, planning, and execution.
arXiv:2606. 28434v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-horizon software engineering agents often need to manage lengthy and noisy interaction histories under limited context budgets.
MemoryArena is a new evaluation gym that benchmarks agent memory in interdependent multi‑session tasks. Unlike prior benchmarks that test memorization or single‑session action in isolation, MemoryArena requires agents to acquire memory while interacting with the environment and then use that memory to guide future decisions across a range of tasks such as web navigation, planning, information search, and formal reasoning. The benchmark reveals that agents excelling on existing long‑context memory tests perform poorly here, highlighting a gap in current memory evaluation methods.
The paper introduces StructMemEval, a benchmark designed to assess how well large language model (LLM) agents can organize their long‑term memory rather than merely recall facts. It compiles tasks that humans typically solve by structuring knowledge—such as transaction ledgers, to‑do lists, and trees—and evaluates agents on these. Experiments show that simple retrieval‑augmented LLMs struggle with such organization tasks, while memory‑augmented agents perform better when explicitly prompted to structure their memory, yet many modern LLMs still fail to recognize memory structures without prompting.