The paper presents a retrieval‑admissibility verification framework for long‑term memory agents, classifying each memory‑query pair as admissible, inadmissible, or unresolved. It evaluates the framework on public benchmarks (RHELM and MemOps), showing improved anchor recall and reduced exact similarity errors, while also revealing that existing verifiers miss certain inadmissible exposures. The study highlights the need for separate checks on candidate support, admissibility, prompt exposure, and answer disclosure to ensure safe memory retrieval.
By Zi Wang, Xingqiao Wang, Emmanuel Addai, Devika Ambekar, Xiaowei Xu
arXiv:2606. 29279v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM agents carry conclusions across steps and sessions in compressed memory, and memory products (e.
By Alex Kwon
arXiv:2606. 22030v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We investigate when belief-based memory actually improves large language model (LLM) agents.
By Pranav Singh
arXiv:2608. 19564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Persistent memory can personalize an LLM agent, but an incorrect durable update can silently distort future behavior.
By Baichuan Li, Junyi Yao, Zihao Zheng
arXiv:2606. 15903v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Where an LLM sits in an agent memory pipeline -- between the recall plane that retrieves stored facts (extensively benchmarked) and the control plane that mutates them via supersede, release, purge (largely untested) -- shapes which forgetting failure modes the system recovers.
By Dongxu Yang
Large language model (LLM) agents solving multi-step tasks frequently commit to trajectories that are doomed to fail, yet continue to consume substantial inference compute before the failure becomes observable. We show that failure is predictable early from the agent's internal representations: lightweight per-round probes on hidden activations anticipate eventual episode failure as early as the first interaction round, where scorers reading only the agent's observable behavior are barely better than chance.