arXiv:2607. 27539v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Exact deletion from persistent language-model memory depends on how that memory represents a record.
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 Machine Learning.
arXiv:2607. 27539v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Exact deletion from persistent language-model memory depends on whether a record's effect remains addressable after later computation.
arXiv:2609.06872v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a user asks an assistant to forget a record, the test is whether the memory now matches the state it would hold if the record had never been store...
This paper introduces a deletion interface for a pretrained language model, measuring how effectively deleted records are removed from the model’s memory. By retrofitting a support‑vector memory gate into the global attention layers of a frozen Gemma 3, the authors show that deletions can be performed without altering weights and that the resulting state is close to a reference state that never stored the record. Experiments on 4B‑parameter models demonstrate low perplexity impact and strong evidence that deleted content is hard to recover, while larger or smaller models fail to achieve the same guarantees.
arXiv:2607. 12204v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Attention can be viewed as an online learner over context, yet existing test-time memories cannot certify that dropping a token leaves outputs unchanged or delete its influence outright.
arXiv:2609. 04875v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-running LLM agents are stateful: beyond the transcript they accrete compressed summaries, plaintext memory, pending tool plans, and, under every serving API, a KV cache.
arXiv:2606. 25449v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A language model's memory can be worse than having no memory at all.