The DOI matches its DataCite record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beyond Goldfish Memory: Long-Term Open-Domain Conversation
Open accessAbstract
Despite recent improvements in open-domain dialogue models, state of the art models are trained and evaluated on short conversations with little context. In contrast, the long-term conversation setting has hardly been studied. In this work we collect and release a human-human dataset consisting of multiple chat sessions whereby the speaking partners learn about each other's interests and discuss the things they have learnt from past sessions. We show how existing models trained on existing datasets perform poorly in this long-term conversation setting in both automatic and human evaluations, and we study long-context models that can perform much better. In particular, we find retrieval-augmented methods and methods with an ability to summarize and recall previous conversations outperform the standard encoder-decoder architectures currently considered state of the art.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Numerous approaches have demonstrated that memory-augmented methods improve the memory capabilities of LLMs without requiring fine-tuning, which is often impossible for API-based models [25, 42, 46].”
From CAIM: Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive AI Memory Framework for Long-Term Interaction with Intelligent Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“MSC [27] is a human-human multi-session open-domain dialogue dataset in which speakers learn about each other across repeated conversations.”
From MRMMIA: Membership Inference Attacks on Memory in Chat Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [27]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Memory-augmented methods extend this concept by retrieving user-specific information from past interactions. This addresses the challenge of a limited context window and enables the integration of past information into the input prompt [25, 29, 45].”
From CAIM: Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive AI Memory Framework for Long-Term Interaction with Intelligent Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Thus, OpenAI released a dataset, namely, PRM800K, which resulted in a SOTA reward model [153].”
From Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation (2023) · cites this paper as [153]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Since the effectiveness of the system is constrained by the performance of the reward model itself, emphasis has been placed on determining the most effective training methods [153].”
From Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation (2023) · cites this paper as [153]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lewis, M., Liu, Y., Goyal, N., Ghazvininejad, M., Mohamed, A., Levy, O., Stoyanov, V., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.703 · Cited by 8,821
On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? 🦜
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445922 · Cited by 6,988
Billion-scale similarity search with GPUs
Johnson, J., Douze, M., & Jegou, H. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Big Data · doi:10.1109/tbdata.2019.2921572 · Cited by 4,228
Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk
Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500002205 · Cited by 3,767
Dense passage retrieval for open-domain question answering
Karpukhin, V., Oguz, B., Min, S., Lewis, P., Wu, L., Edunov, S., Chen, D., & Yih, W.-T. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.550 · Cited by 3,575
Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks
Lewis, P., Perez, E., Piktus, A., Petroni, F., Karpukhin, V., Goyal, N., Küttler, H., Lewis, M., Yih, W.-T., Rocktäschel, T., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.11401 · Cited by 3,101
Longformer: The Long-Document Transformer
Beltagy, I., Peters, M. E., & Cohan, A. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2004.05150 · Cited by 2,281
Reading Wikipedia to answer open-domain questions
Chen, D., Fisch, A., Weston, J., & Bordes, A. (2017) · Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-1171 · Cited by 1,546
Self-citationReformer: The Efficient Transformer
Kitaev, N., Kaiser, Ł., & Levskaya, A. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.04451 · Cited by 1,435
MELD: A Multimodal Multi-Party Dataset for Emotion Recognition in Conversations
Poria, S., Hazarika, D., Majumder, N., Naik, G., Cambria, E., & Mihalcea, R. (2019) · Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/p19-1050 · Cited by 1,416
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation
Ji, Z., Lee, N., Frieske, R., Yu, T., Su, D., Xu, Y., Ishii, E., Bang, Y. J., Madotto, A., & Fung, P. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3571730 · Cited by 5,025
“[153] introduce a dataset consisting of over 40 utterances per episode on average.”
BackgroundUnleashing the potential of prompt engineering for large language models
CHEN, B. ‐., Zhang, Z., Langrené, N., & Zhu, S. (2025) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2025.101260 · Cited by 1,097
Siriwardhana, S., Weerasekera, R., Wen, E., Kaluarachchi, T., Rana, R., & Nanayakkara, S. (2023) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00530 · Cited by 337
“Using both parametric and non-parametric memory generally leads to reduced hallucinations and higher interpretability in tasks like question answering and summarization (Xu et al., 2021; Komeili et al., 2021; Guu et al., 2020; Lewis et al., 2020b).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialJo, E., Epstein, D. A., Jung, H., & Kim, Y.-H. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581503 · Cited by 174
A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents
Zhang, Z., Dai, Q., Bo, X., Ma, C., Li, R., Chen, X., Zhu, J., Dong, Z., & Wen, J.-R. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3748302 · Cited by 592
“Some previous works have constructed several datasets to support the evaluation of LLM-based agents [26, 191, 194], and some benchmarks also conduct evaluations on the memory capability of LLM-based agents [102, 182, 219].”
Metadata
- Authors
- Xu, J., Szlam, A., & Weston, J.
- Affiliations
- Meta (United States) (US)
- ORCID
- Xu, Jing
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2021
- Pages
- 5180-5197
- ISSN
- 0736-587X (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2107.07567
- OpenAlex
- W3186804217
- Cited by
- 148
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 5
- FWCI
- 16.87
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
- Keywords
- open-domain dialogue, long-context models, retrieval-augmented generation, dialogue summarization, chatbot evaluation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
