arXiv Computation and Language By Baichuan Li, Junyi Yao, Zihao Zheng

Remember, Verify, or Ask? Cross-Family Evaluation of Memory Commitment in LLM Agents

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

arXiv:2608. 19564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Persistent memory can personalize an LLM agent, but an incorrect durable update can silently distort future behavior.

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 Computation and Language.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 23

MoM: Memory of Memory

arXiv:2609.25054v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: For a long-horizon LLM agent, the memory question is not what was once recorded but what \emph{currently holds}. Most designs answer it only indirectly...

By Bowen Qin, Yao Lu
arXiv AI
Sep 18

Correct Now, Insufficient Later: Auditing Update Sufficiency in Context Compression

The paper investigates how memory systems can answer a current query correctly yet fail to retain distinctions needed for later updates. Using a paired‑history audit, the authors evaluate 24 history pairs across six synthetic mechanisms and two model backends, achieving perfect reveal accuracy on DeepSeek and high accuracy on GLM. Record‑level audits reveal specific failures in structured reveal memories and frontier late‑reference adequacy, and the authors test a label‑equivariant repair that only partially restores correctness.

By Guangzhe Zhang
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 1

MemSyco-Bench: Benchmarking Sycophancy in Agent Memory

Memory has emerged as a cornerstone of modern LLM-based agents, supporting their evolution from single-turn assistants to long-term collaborators. However, memory is not always beneficial: retrieved memories often induce a critical issue of sycophancy, causing agents to over-align with the user at the cost of factual accuracy or objective reasoning.

arXiv AI
Oct 9

What to Admit and How to Present: Governing Persistent Memory in LLM Agents

The paper introduces two inference‑time designs—factor‑compiled admission (FC) and permission‑semantic admission (PS)—to govern persistent memory in large language model agents without retraining. FC evaluates entire memory entries, while PS decomposes entries into typed units, both using deterministic policies to decide what recalled information enters the working context and how it is expressed. Experiments on a development suite and an external benchmark show that FC and PS reduce failure rates and cross‑domain leakage compared to verbatim injection, though they increase personalization failures and do not meet all preregistered criteria.

By Chang Liu, Deliang Ding