The DOI matches its DataCite record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 2 of the 11 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory
Open accessAbstract
We propose MemoryBank, a novel memory mechanism tailored for LLMs. MemoryBank enables the models to summon relevant memories, continually evolve through continuous memory updates, comprehend, and adapt to a user personality by synthesizing information from past interactions. To mimic anthropomorphic behaviors and selectively preserve memory, MemoryBank incorporates a memory updating mechanism, inspired by the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve theory.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
MemoryBank is proposed as a long-term memory layer for LLMs, combining memory storage, retrieval, and a forgetting-curve-inspired updating mechanism, and SiliconFriend is an AI companion built on it. In simulated and real-user evaluations, the ChatGPT-backed variant performed best overall, while open-source variants showed strong retrieval accuracy.
Key findings
- MemoryBank stores detailed conversation records, hierarchical event summaries, and evolving user portraits; retrieval uses dense dual-tower indexing, and updating increases memory strength when a memory is recalled and resets elapsed time.
- SiliconFriend was tuned on 38k psychological dialogues and integrated with MemoryBank across ChatGPT, ChatGLM, and BELLE.
- In the quantitative test with 10 days of conversations, 15 virtual users, and 194 probing questions (97 English, 97 Chinese), SiliconFriend ChatGPT was the best overall variant: English retrieval 0.763, correctness 0.716, coherence 0.912, ranking 0.818; Chinese retrieval 0.711, correctness 0.655, coherence 0.675, ranking 0.758.
- Open-source variants had high retrieval accuracy—English ChatGLM 0.809 and BELLE 0.814; Chinese ChatGLM 0.84 and BELLE 0.856—but lower scores on other metrics; ChatGLM and ChatGPT did better in English, while BELLE did better in Chinese.
Methods
- Design: MemoryBank consists of memory storage, dual-tower dense retrieval with FAISS indexing, and an Ebbinghaus-inspired memory updater; SiliconFriend uses LoRA tuning (rank 16, 3 epochs, A100) on 38k psychological dialogues for open-source models, then integrates memory.
- Data and evaluation: qualitative analysis used real-user dialogs, while quantitative analysis used a simulated memory storage of 10 days, 15 virtual users, and 194 probing questions; human annotators scored retrieval accuracy, response correctness, contextual coherence, and model ranking.
- Models and retrieval: ChatGPT, ChatGLM (6.2B), and BELLE (7B LLaMA) were used; embeddings were MiniLM for English and Text2vec for Chinese via LangChain.
Limitations
- The paper states that its memory updating model is exploratory and highly simplified, that real memory is more complex and influenced by many factors, and that forgetting curves differ across people and information types; it also notes that Ebbinghaus theory includes additional phenomena such as overlearning and material meaningfulness, but this work simulates only three listed rules.
- Evident from the text: the quantitative evaluation relies on ChatGPT-simulated users and manually written probing questions rather than a long-term real deployment, and no statistical tests or comparisons against alternative memory mechanisms are reported.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
29 Own interpretation · 14 Own result · 8 No basis given · 5 Sources not found · 2 Couldn’t confirm · 1 Own method · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“MemoryBank is versatile in accommodating both closed-source models like ChatGPT and opensource models such as ChatGLM.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
“MemoryBank is versatile as it can accommodate both closed-source LLMs like ChatGPT and open-source LLMs like ChatGLM (Zeng et al., 2022) or BELLE (Yunjie Ji & Li, 2023).”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Zeng et al., 2022 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes GLM-130B as an open model, and the Reproducibility section says its weights and code are open. Neither passage addresses MemoryBank, ChatGLM, or whether MemoryBank accommodates closed- and open-source models; searches for those terms found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Not matchedcites Yunjie Ji & Li, 2023
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Despite showing potential, these methods have not fully addressed the need for a reliable and adaptable long-term memory function in LLMs.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Meng & Huang, 2018 source
- Could not verifycites Graves et al., 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (p. 1) reports preliminary success on simple tasks, and §4 Experiments (p. 10) says the networks’ memory was reset between episodes. Neither passage assesses whether memory-augmented methods provide reliable, adaptable long-term memory in LLMs; a search for that limitation found no such assessment in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results of our analysis reveal that Sili-conFriend, equipped with MemoryBank, exhibits a strong capability for long-term companionship”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(2) Bilingual ability in both Chinese and English”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“understand user personality”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
“understanding of user portraits”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further tuned with psychological dialog data, SiliconFriend displays heightened empathy and discernment in its interactions.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
“A distinctive features of SiliconFriend is its tuning with 38k psychological conversations, collected from various online sources, which enables it to exhibit empathy, carefulness, and provide useful guidance”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The 38k psychological conversations collected from online sources are suitable for tuning an LLM to provide empathetic support.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, it correctly identified an event (i.e., the heap sort algorithm) that had not been discussed before.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Memory Recall Analysis
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We show the generalizability of MemoryBank in three key aspects: ( 1) Accommodation of both open-source and closed-source LLMs”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SiliconFriend's responses stand out due to their emotional support, showcasing a stark contrast to its baseline ChatGLM.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Psychological Companionship
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Experiment results showcase the capabilities of SiliconFriend in memory recall, provision of empathetic companionship, and understanding of user portraits.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 17
- Probably not a substantial claim. 14
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This tuning process enables SiliconFriend to understand and respond to emotional cues effectively, mimicking the empathy, understanding, and support of a human companion.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 3 SiliconFriend: An AI Chatbot Companion Powered by MemoryBank
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The 38k psychological conversations collected from online sources are suitable for tuning an LLM to provide empathetic support.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All these models answer correctly and coherently.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Memory Storage Construction:
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The versatility of MemoryBank is demonstrated through its accommodation of both open-source models such as ChatGLM and BELLE, and close-source models like ChatGPT.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 6 Conclusion
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SiliconFriend BELLE and SiliconFriend ChatGLM also have high performance in retrieval accuracy, showing the generality and effectiveness of our MemoryBank mechanism for both open-source and closed-source LLMs.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SiliconFriend ChatGLM and SiliconFriend ChatGPT deliver better results in English, while SiliconFriend BELLE excells in Chinese.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(3) Applicability with and without memory forgetting mechanism.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Models' performance varies on different languages.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As demonstrated in Fig. 2, when a user expresses emotional difficulties and seeks assistance from SiliconFriend, the model is capable of delivering empathetic responses along with constructive suggestions.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Psychological Companionship
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This stage is vital as it equips SiliconFriend with the ability to store, retrieve past interactions and understand user portraits”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 3 SiliconFriend: An AI Chatbot Companion Powered by MemoryBank
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SiliconFriend BELLE and SiliconFriend ChatGLM also have high performance in retrieval accuracy, showing the generality and effectiveness of our MemoryBank mechanism for both open-source and closed-source LLMs.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is worth noting that the embedding models can be flexibly interchanged to suit varying needs”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 3 SiliconFriend: An AI Chatbot Companion Powered by MemoryBank
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“LoRA significantly reduces the quantity of trainable parameters by learning pairs of rank-decomposition matrices, while keeping the original weights frozen.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 3 SiliconFriend: An AI Chatbot Companion Powered by MemoryBank
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hu et al., 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This design improves the anthropomorphism of AI in long-term interactions scenarios.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 6 Conclusion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“However, these conversations are generally restricted to a few rounds of conversation, which can not align with the application scenarios of long-term AI companions.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Xu et al., 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Xu et al., 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consequently, SiliconFriend can generate responses that refer past memories and deliver interactions tailored to the user's portrait.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 3 SiliconFriend: An AI Chatbot Companion Powered by MemoryBank
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Equipped with MemoryBank, SiliconFriend can establish a deeper understanding of users, offering more personalized and meaningful interactions, emphasizing the potential for MemoryBank to humanize AI interactions.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 6 Conclusion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“MemoryBank enhances the ability to maintain context over time, recall relevant information, and understand user personality.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 6 Conclusion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Moreover, these models often fail to create a detailed user portrait and lack a human-like memory updating mechanism, both crucial for facilitating more natural interactions.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Xu et al., 2021
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Xu et al., 2022
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These instances underscore SiliconFriend's successful memory recall and recognition capabilities.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Memory Recall Analysis
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to note that this is an exploratory and highly simplified memory updating model.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 2.3 Memory Updating Mechanism
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In conclusion, these stages transform SiliconFriend from a standard AI chatbot into a long-term AI companion, capable of remembering and learning from past interactions to provide personalized and empathetic user experience.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 3 SiliconFriend: An AI Chatbot Companion Powered by MemoryBank
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Forgetting Curve theory by Ebbinghaus (1964) offers valuable insights into the pattern of memory retention and forgetting over time.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Result Analysis.
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ebbinghaus (1964)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Ebbinghaus forgetting curve is expressed using an exponential decay model: R = e -t S , where R is the memory retention, or what fraction of the information can be retained.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 2.3 Memory Updating Mechanism
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ebbinghaus
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The memory updating mechanism operates using principles inspired by the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve theory, allowing for a realistic and human-like memory recall process.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 3 SiliconFriend: An AI Chatbot Companion Powered by MemoryBank
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve theory is applicable to artificial memory updating in LLMs.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, we introduce MemoryBank, a novel mechanism designed to provide LLMs with the ability to retain long-term memory and draw user portraits.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“we propose MemoryBank, a novel memory mechanism tailored for LLMs.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 1 Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite this, a notable hindrance remains-the deficiency of a long-term memory mechanism within these models.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
“Despite the remarkable capabilities of LLMs, a key limitation is their lack of long-term memory, an essential aspect of human-like communication, particularly noticeable in scenarios requiring sustained interactions like personal companionship, psychological counseling, and secretarial tasks.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · plain
The paper relies on this without support.
The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve theory is applicable to artificial memory updating in LLMs.
“inspired by the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve theory”
“Our memory forgetting mechanism is inspired from Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve theory”
The paper relies on this without support.
ChatGPT can validly simulate multiple users with diverse characteristics for evaluating MemoryBank.
“for which ChatGPT plays the role of users and generates dialog contexts according to their personalities.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 38k psychological conversations collected from online sources are suitable for tuning an LLM to provide empathetic support.
“The initial stage of Silicon-Friend's development involves tuning the LLMs using a dataset of 38k psychological dialogues.This data, parsed from online sources, comprises a range of conversations that cover an array of emotional states and responses.”
The paper relies on this without support.
LLMs lack a robust long-term memory function, which hinders their ability to maintain context over long periods and retrieve pertinent information from past interactions.
“A noticeable gap lies in their deficiency in a robust long-term memory function.”
“This limitation hinders their ability to maintain context over a long period and retrieve pertinent information from past interactions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is a need for a long-term memory mechanism to empower LLMs in scenarios requiring personalized and persistent interactions.
“In summary, while significant progress has been made in the field of LLMs, there is still a need for long-term memory mechanism to empower LLMs in the scenarios requiring personalized and persistent interactions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The ability to exhibit empathy in a conversation is a key attribute of an effective AI companion.
“The ability to exhibit empathy in a conversation is a key attribute of an effective AI companion.”
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 cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“However, these approaches largely treat memory as a passive information store.”
From Evo-Harness: Context-to-Harness Skill Compilation for Self-Evolving Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, such methods ignore the dynamic changes in human psychological states.”
From H-MEM: Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“While this method solves the long-term memory problem of LLM Agents well, there are still shortcomings in structured memory storage and efficient systematic memory retrieval, and further optimization and improvement are needed.”
From H-MEM: Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Memory in textual form (Li et al., 2023; Huang et al., 2023; Zhong et al., 2024) offers good interpretability and implementation convenience for long-term memory in LLMs.”
From Evaluating the Long-Term Memory of Large Language Models (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These methods are efficient, but limited query construction and candidate filtering often introduce retrieval noise, resulting in unstable answer accuracy.”
From Lightweight LLM Agent Memory with Small Language Models (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
“Existing research has effectively simulated the forgetting process of human memory with the help of the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve, taking into account the characteristics of the enhanced strength of memory after it is called upon (Zhong et al., 2024).”
From Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Among all the baseline methods, only MemoryBank and H-MEM adopt a memory mechanism that encodes memory into vector representations and retrieves it via similarity-based matching.”
From Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, such methods ignore the dynamic changes in human psychological states.”
From Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The first class of benchmarks focuses on evaluating memorization through recall or retrieval over static long-context inputs in question answering or summarization settings”
From MemoryArena: Benchmarking Agent Memory in Interdependent Multi-Session Agentic Tasks (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Timestampaware retrieval down-weights older memories as new ones accumulate [31, 52].”
From Transferable End-to-End Optimization for Indirect Long-Term Memory Poisoning in LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [52]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Existing memory systems use vector stores, knowledge graphs, or persistent files to retain information across sessions”
From IFCMemoryBench: Evaluating Long-Term Memory of LLM-Based Agents in BIM Information Retrieval (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Along the first direction, some methods such as MemGPT [11] and MemoryBank [32], use buffer-based systems to store conversational or episodic traces and retrieve them with embedding search and simple heuristics.”
From Learning Hierarchical Procedural Memory for LLM Agents through Bayesian Selection and Contrastive Refinement (2025) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Many systems retain free-form text snippets such as notes, summaries, or dialogue chunks; these are easy to write but suffer from retrieval drift and weak compositionality as repositories scale [11, 32].”
From Learning Hierarchical Procedural Memory for LLM Agents through Bayesian Selection and Contrastive Refinement (2025) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Many systems retain free-form text snippets such as notes, summaries, or dialogue chunks; these are easy to write but suffer from retrieval drift and weak compositionality as repositories scale [11, 32].”
From Learning Hierarchical Procedural Memory for LLM Agents through Bayesian Selection and Contrastive Refinement (2025) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Yet many LLM agent memory systems first decompose histories into isolated turns or fixed-size chunks, then compensate through enrichment, consolidation, or retrieval mechanisms still tied to semantic proximity or fragment-level records.”
From Membox: Weaving Topic Continuity into Long-Range Memory for LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These methods improve capacity and flexibility, but still operate over turns, chunks, summaries, or mutable records and rely on update or retrieval to compensate for fragmentation.”
From Membox: Weaving Topic Continuity into Long-Range Memory for LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, most methods employ fixed Topk retrieval strategies ( e.g. Memorybank [56] Top5, Mem0 [7] Top-30), which may introduce both redundancy and noise.”
From HingeMem: Boundary Guided Long-Term Memory with Query Adaptive Retrieval for Scalable Dialogues (2026) · cites this paper as [56]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Although previous studies and reviews have provided detailed explanations of memory mechanisms, most of the existing work focuses on analyzing and explaining memory from the temporal (time) dimension, specifically in terms of short-term and long-term memory [8, 7, 17].”
From From Human Memory to AI Memory: A Survey on Memory Mechanisms in the Era of LLMs (2025) · cites this paper as [17]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, long-horizon deployments still lack a unified maintenance-and-recovery interface: updates are often performed via in-place replacement or ad-hoc archiving, without explicit lineage and budgeted recovery to immutable evidence, so redundancy, entanglement, and superseded states increasingly crowd a fixed window (Zhong et al., 2024; Chhikara et al., 2025; Rasmussen et al., 2025).”
From All-Mem: Agentic Lifelong Memory via Dynamic Topology Evolution (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“especially considering that existing datasets like personalized chats sourced through crowdsourcing (Zhang et al., 2018) or psychological dialogues (Zhong et al., 2024) lack this property.”
From Crafting Personalized Agents through Retrieval-Augmented Generation on Editable Memory Graphs (2024) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Existing approaches employ unstructured formats such as summarization (Zhong et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2025) or compression (Pan et al., 2025; Chen et al., 2025), but struggle with temporal modeling and content overlap, leading to information loss and fragmented representations.”
From Pre-Storage Reasoning for Episodic Memory: Shifting Inference Burden to Memory for Personalized Dialogue (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Usercentric benchmarks, such as MSC (Xu et al., 2022a) and MemoryBank (Zhong et al., 2024), primarily evaluate conversational consistency, measuring an agent's ability to retain persona information, recall user preferences, and sustain coherent interactions across multi-session or multi-turn dialogue.”
From A Survey of Agent Memory in the Second Half: Towards Self-Evolving and Long-Horizon Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Most existing agent memory designs remain text-centric, treating memory as an ever-growing collection of past interactions, summaries, or episodic logs that are retrieved and injected into the prompt (Xu et al., 2025e; Zhong et al., 2024).”
From A Survey of Agent Memory in the Second Half: Towards Self-Evolving and Long-Horizon Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, retrieval-based external memory systems incur low online overhead but suffer from unstable accuracy due to limited query construction and candidate filtering.”
From Lightweight LLM Agent Memory with Small Language Models (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Recently, several commercial (OpenAI, 2024; Coze, 2024) and open-source assistant systems with memory (Zhong et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2024) have been introduced.”
From LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memory (2024) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Conversely, compressing sessions into summaries or user-specific facts, as seen in prior work such as Zhong et al. (2024) and Du et al. (2024), can lead to information loss, harming the performance of the system to answer detailed questions.”
From LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memory (2024) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Existing memory systems encode conversation history as embedding vectors and retrieve information through semantic similarity. This paradigm fails to capture the associative structure of human memory, wherein related experiences progressively strengthen interconnections through repeated co-activation.”
From HeLa-Mem: Hebbian Learning and Associative Memory for LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Recent approaches involve retrieving historical context from a range of previous dialogues and reasoning over retrieved segments in a temporal order (Lee et al., 2023b; Lu et al., 2023; Zhong et al., 2023; Liang et al., 2023) and/or using events to scaffold the dialogues (Jang et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2023) to enable consistency in long-term conversations.”
From Evaluating Very Long-Term Conversational Memory of LLM Agents (2024) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“To address the limit of LLMs struggling in retaining information from long input text, recent studies turn to equip LLM agents with memory to support long-turn conversations (Lu et al., 2023;Packer et al., 2023;Zhong et al., 2024).”
From TReMu: Towards Neuro-Symbolic Temporal Reasoning for LLM-Agents with Memory in Multi-Session Dialogues (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Secondly, these systems rely on fixed retrievers (Li et al., 2025; Zhong et al., 2024), which struggle to adapt to the diverse retrieval demands of varying dialogue domains and individual user interaction patterns.”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“MemoryBank (Zhong et al., 2024) retrieves historical context by maintaining a structured memory where both conversational summaries and round-level utterances are stored as keyvalue pairs.”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Secondly, these systems rely on fixed retrievers (Li et al., 2025; Zhong et al., 2024), which struggle to adapt to the diverse retrieval demands of varying dialogue domains and individual user interaction patterns.”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“MemoryBank (Zhong et al., 2024) retrieves historical context by maintaining a structured memory where both conversational summaries and round-level utterances are stored as keyvalue pairs.”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“For both methods, retrieval operates in a non-hierarchical manner, meaning that all stored data is accessed through a uniform search mechanism without additional interaction-based refinement.”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Memory storage is often inefficient, hindering quick access and selective retrieval, which results in slower and less accurate decisions (Zhong et al., 2024).”
From An Efficient Context-Dependent Memory Framework for LLM-Centric Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Prior research [25, 10, 20] demonstrates that granting agents access to a persistent memory of past interactions can significantly enhance task performance; however, most existing designs assume a single-user setting, thus overlooking the benefits of cross-user knowledge transfer.”
From Collaborative Memory: Multi-User Memory Sharing in LLM Agents with Dynamic Access Control (2025) · cites this paper as [25]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The weights were fixed a priori and were not tuned: they encode a prior, drawn from the memorystream and forgetting-curve literature [Park et al., 2023, Zhong et al., 2024], that access-driven signals (recency, frequency) should dominate structural and age-based ones.”
From Selective Forgetting: A Graph-Based Memory Framework for Long-Term LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“While previous studies have proposed many promising memory mechanisms, they are scattered in different papers, and there lacks a systematical review to summarize and compare these works from a holistic perspective, failing to abstract common and effective designing patterns for inspiring future studies.”
From A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Zhong et al. [6] store memory information in the form of natural languages, which is explainable and friendly to the users.”
From A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, to enable such skills and to ensure meaningful long-term interactions, it is crucial to remember past information beyond the limitations of the context window and to correctly reference it in ongoing conversations [4, 64].”
From CAIM: Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive AI Memory Framework for Long-Term Interaction with Intelligent Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [64]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Existing memory-augmented approaches lack effective retrieval and prioritization mechanisms, often resulting in the inclusion of irrelevant data, decreasing the correctness of responses, which negatively impacts user experience and interaction continuity [35, 64].”
From CAIM: Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive AI Memory Framework for Long-Term Interaction with Intelligent Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [64]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This selective retrieval is important for interactive systems, where irrelevant information can negatively influence interaction quality [58, 64].”
From CAIM: Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive AI Memory Framework for Long-Term Interaction with Intelligent Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [64]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Most existing agent memory systems (Zhong et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2025; Chhikara et al., 2025) do not provide this topic-level access path.”
From Membox: Weaving Topic Continuity into Long-Range Memory for LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“MemoryBank enhances long-term interaction capabilities by encoding memories into vector representations and retrieving them through similarity-based search (Zhong et al., 2024).”
From H-MEM: Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Existing memory systems [25, 39, 28, 21] for LLM agents provide basic memory storage functionality.”
From A-Mem: Agentic Memory for LLM Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [39]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Therefore, using the value itself as the key, a common practice in prior works (Zhong et al., 2024; Maharana et al., 2024), may be suboptimal.”
From LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memory (2024) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“For instance, MemoryBank (Zhong et al., 2024) and PerLTQA (Du et al., 2024) insufficiently evaluate the ability to synthesize information across numerous sessions or to reason with temporal metadata or time references.”
From LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memory (2024) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In many practical applications, such as personal assistants (Lu et al., 2023), personalized recommendations (Wang et al., 2023c), and dialogue systems (Zhong et al., 2024), models need to retain and utilize past information over the long term to provide more accurate and consistent responses.”
From Evaluating the Long-Term Memory of Large Language Models (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Regarding the baselines, we follow the original papers in terms of experimental data and configuration settings (Packer et al., 2023; Zhong et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2025).”
From Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“LLMs remain fundamentally constrained due to the lack of persistent long-term memory (Zhong et al., 2023;Wu et al., 2025).”
From From Recall to Forgetting: Benchmarking Long-Term Memory for Personalized Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This example reflects a broader fragmentation-compensation paradigm : dialogue continuity is first broken into separately stored fragments, and later mechanisms such as enrichment, consolidation, or retrieval attempt to compensate by adding back related context.”
From Membox: Weaving Topic Continuity into Long-Range Memory for LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“MemoryBank [31] provides temporal-aware memory architecture.”
From SuperLocalMemory: Privacy-Preserving Multi-Agent Memory with Bayesian Trust Defense Against Memory Poisoning (2026) · cites this paper as [31]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This contrasts with systems like MemoryBank [Zhong et al., 2023] and ReadAgent [Lee et al., 2024] that rely primarily on embedding-based retrieval.”
From Cognis: Context-Aware Memory for Conversational AI Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Ebbinghaus-curve decay applied to chatbot memory; published at AAAI 2024.”
From Memory for Autonomous LLM Agents:Mechanisms, Evaluation, and Emerging Frontiers (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Nevertheless, LLMs face limitations on tasks relying heavily on personal knowledge accumulated through long-term user-AI interactions, such as psychological counseling or secretarial duties (Zhong et al., 2024).”
From LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memory (2024) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This necessity propels the evolution of memory mechanisms from the paradigm of static storage toward that of active management, integrating awareness of temporal factors, policies for decay, and methods for retrieval with enhanced flexibility (Zhong et al., 2023; Siyue et al., 2024; Salama et al., 2025; Du et al., 2025a; Houichime et al., 2025).”
From From Storage to Experience: A Survey on the Evolution of LLM Agent Memory Mechanisms (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Zhong et al. (2023) models temporal decay via the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve”
From From Storage to Experience: A Survey on the Evolution of LLM Agent Memory Mechanisms (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2023
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Existing memory systems typically emphasize storing, updating, and retrieving relevant records (Packer et al., 2023;Zhong et al., 2024;Park et al., 2023;Mem0 Team, 2026), which is crucial for personalization, persistent user state, and cross-session recall.”
From Remember When It Matters: Proactive Memory Agent for Long-Horizon Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“• MBMemory (MemoryBank [14]): A multi-layered memory model with dynamic summarization and forgetting mechanism.”
From MemEngine: A Unified and Modular Library for Developing Advanced Memory of LLM-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [14]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The retrieval process involves directly matching user queries to the most relevant stored information, ensuring efficient context retrieval for response generation.”
From In Prospect and Retrospect: Reflective Memory Management for Long-term Personalized Dialogue Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Existing systems often optimize only one side of this process. STM-oriented methods organize or compress the current reasoning state (Qian et al., 2026; Li et al., 2025), whereas LTM-oriented methods build external stores for persistent recall (Zhong et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2025).”
From Verifiable Memory: Learning Unified Memory Management with Local and Global Verifiers for Large Language Model Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Standard retrieval methods like RAG and MemoryBank (Zhong et al., 2024) rely fundamentally on vector similarity (Karpukhin et al., 2020; Khattab and Zaharia, 2020), representing memories as isolated points in embedding space (Hu et al., 2025). Consequently, they struggle with queries requiring causal bridging between semantically dissimilar or distant events (Yang et al., 2018; Qi et al., 2019; Tr”
From Synapse: Empowering LLM Agents with Episodic-Semantic Memory via Spreading Activation (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Many works stress that effective memory management is crucial for agent performance(Zhong et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2025e; Yan et al., 2024).”
From A Survey of Self-Evolving Agents: What, When, How, and Where to Evolve on the Path to Artificial Super Intelligence (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“MemoryBank [6] employs a dual-tower dense retrieval model to find related information from past conversations. Each memory entry is encoded into an embedding and subsequently indexed by FAISS [124] to improve the efficiency of retrieval. When reading memories, the current context will be encoded as representations to obtain the most relevant memory.”
From A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [6]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Nevertheless, as the number of memory entries increases, the computational complexity of vector retrieval also rises sharply, posing challenges to system performance.”
From H-MEM: Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“These systems require agent developers to predefine memory storage structures, specify storage points within the workflow, and establish retrieval timing.”
From A-Mem: Agentic Memory for LLM Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [39]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Previous studies often utilize external models to expand the range of possible actions.In comparison to APIs, external models typically handle more complex tasks.Each external model may correspond to multiple APIs.”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [39]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Nevertheless, as the number of memory entries increases, the computational complexity of vector retrieval also rises sharply, posing challenges to system performance.”
From Hierarchical Memory for High-Efficiency Long-Term Reasoning in LLM Agents (2025) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Existing evaluations of agents with memory typically assess memorization and action in isolation.”
From MemoryArena: Benchmarking Agent Memory in Interdependent Multi-Session Agentic Tasks (2026) · cites this paper as Zhong et al., 2024
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Existing memory systems assume stored experiences are trustworthy and rarely track provenance.”
From MemoryGraft: Persistent Compromise of LLM Agents via Poisoned Experience Retrieval (2025) · cites this paper as [1]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 4 Experiments
“Moreover, to demonstrate the model's proficiency in memory recall on a broader scale, we design a qualitative analysis that uses simulated long-term dialog history and 194 memory probing questions.”
§ MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory > 1 Introduction
“To evaluate the effectiveness of MemoryBank, we conduct evaluations covering both qualitative and quantitative analyses, where the former involves real-world user dialogs and the latter employs simulated dialogs.”
Citations
Cites
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372 · cited 1×
“Large Language Models: LLMs such as GPT-3 (Brown et al., 2020), OPT (Zhang et al.”
MethodLoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models
Hu, E. J., Shen, Y., Wallis, P., Allen-Zhu, Z., Li, Y., Wang, S., Wang, L., & Chen, W. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2106.09685 · Cited by 13,453 · cited 2×
“To adapt LLMs to scenarios with limited computational resources, we utilize a computation-efficient tuning approach, known as the Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) method (Hu et al., 2021).”
MethodDense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answering
Karpukhin, V., Oğuz, B., Min, S., Lewis, P., Wu, L., Edunov, S., Chen, D., & Yih, W.-T. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2004.04906 · Cited by 5,311
LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models
Touvron, H., Lavril, T., Izacard, G., Martinet, X., Lachaux, M.-A., Lacroix, T., Rozière, B., Goyal, N., Hambro, E., Azhar, F., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.13971 · Cited by 4,602 · cited 1×
“In conclusion, these stages transform SiliconFriend from a standard AI chatbot into a long-term AI companion, capable of remembering and learning from past interactions to provide personalized and empathetic user experience.”
BackgroundBillion-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 · cited 3×
“LangChain supports open-source embedding models and FAISS indexing, making it a versatile choice.”
MethodInfluentialDense 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 · cited 1×
“It is designed to serve as an emotional companion for users, recalling pertinent user memories, and understanding users’ personalities and emotional states.”
BackgroundPaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways
Chowdhery, A., Narang, S., Devlin, J., Bosma, M., Mishra, G., Roberts, A., Barham, P., Chung, H. W., Sutton, C., Gehrmann, S., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2204.02311 · Cited by 2,590 · cited 1×
“Recently, cutting-edge closed-source language models, like PaLM (Chowdhery et al., 2022), GPT-4 (OpenAI, 2023) and ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2022), continue to display substantial flexibility, adapting to a wide variety of domains.”
BackgroundA Survey of Large Language Models
Zhao, W. X., Zhou, K., Li, J., Tang, T., Dong, Z., Hou, Y., Zhang, B., Min, Y., Zhang, J., Liu, P., et al. (2026) · Frontiers of Computer Science · doi:10.1007/s11704-026-60308-3 · Cited by 2,093
A Survey of Large Language Models
Zhao, W. X., Zhou, K., Li, J., Tang, T., Wang, X., Hou, Y., Min, Y., Zhang, B., Zhang, J., Dong, Z., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.18223 · Cited by 2,090
Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Models
Chung, H. W., Hou, L., Longpre, S., Zoph, B., Tay, Y., Fedus, W., Li, Y., Wang, X., Dehghani, M., Brahma, S., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2210.11416 · Cited by 1,441 · cited 1×
“, 2022), and FLAN-T5 (Chung et al., 2022) have made remarkable strides in a broad spectrum of natural language processing tasks in recent years.”
Background
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–347 of 347
Collaborative Memory: Multi-User Memory Sharing in LLM Agents with Dynamic Access Control
Rezazadeh, A., Li, Z., Lou, A., Zhao, Y., Wei, W., & Bao, Y. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.18279
“Prior research [25, 10, 20] demonstrates that granting agents access to a persistent memory of past interactions can significantly enhance task performance; however, most existing designs assume a single-user setting, thus overlooking the benefits of cross-user knowledge transfer.”
MemTrace: Probing What Final Accuracy Misses in Long-Term Memory
Long, X., Chen, Z., Zeng, S., Wang, S., Guo, K., & Tang, J. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.17328
Hindsight: Structured Agent Memory that Retains, Recalls, and Reflects
Latimer, C., Boschi, N., Neeser, A., Bartholomew, C., Srivastava, G., Wang, X., & Ramakrishnan, N. (2026) · Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 3: System Demonstrations) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.acl-demo.27 · Cited by 5
Cherif, A. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.00009 · Cited by 1
Transferable End-to-End Optimization for Indirect Long-Term Memory Poisoning in LLM Agents
Zang, C., Wang, J., Chen, W., Meng, X., Wang, L., Gao, X., Li, Z., & Guo, S. (2026) · arXiv
MRMMIA: Membership Inference Attacks on Memory in Chat Agents
Chen, K., Pang, Y., & Wang, T. (2026) · arXiv · Cited by 4
IFCMemoryBench: Evaluating Long-Term Memory of LLM-Based Agents in BIM Information Retrieval
Du, C., Vosseler, A., Mazza, F., & Borrmann, A. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.26072
Remember When It Matters: Proactive Memory Agent for Long-Horizon Agents
Wu, Y., Zhang, L., Zhou, Y., Wang, M., Peng, B., Li, S., Fan, X., & Zhao, Z. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.08716 · Cited by 20
Weighted Memory Tree: Remembering What Matters for Long-Horizon LLM Agents
Dao, Q., Kathalkar, P., & Eaton, K. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.20631 · Cited by 1
Lumer, E., Gulati, A., Subbiah, V. K., Basavaraju, P. H., & Burke, J. A. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2507.21428 · Cited by 19
RecMem: Recurrence-based Memory Consolidation for Efficient and Effective Long-Running LLM Agents
Dai, Z., Deng, S., Guan, S., Tian, Y., Yao, X., Yan, X., & Cheng, J. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026 · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-acl.1619
From Recall to Forgetting: Benchmarking Long-Term Memory for Personalized Agents
Uddin, M. N., Shubham, K., Blanco, E., Baral, C., & Wang, G. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.20006 · Cited by 32
MemoryArena: Benchmarking Agent Memory in Interdependent Multi-Session Agentic Tasks
He, Z., Wang, Y., Zhi, C., Hu, Y., Chen, T.-P., Yin, L., Chen, Z., Wu, T. A., Ouyang, S., Wang, Z., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.16313
Self-citationMemRefine: LLM-Guided Compression for Long-Term Agent Memory
Kim, M., Baek, J., Jeong, S., & Hwang, S. J. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.13177
Anatomy of Agentic Memory: Taxonomy and Empirical Analysis of Evaluation and System Limitations
Jiang, D., Li, Y., Wei, S., Yang, J., Kishore, A., Zhao, A., Kang, D., Hu, X., Chen, F., Li, Q., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.19320
Membox: Weaving Topic Continuity into Long-Range Memory for LLM Agents
Tao, D., Ma, G., Huang, Y., & Jiang, M. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.03785
The AI Hippocampus: How Far are We From Human Memory?
Jia, Z., Li, J., Kang, Y., Wang, Y., Wu, T., Wang, Q., Wang, X., Zhang, S., Shen, J., Li, Q., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.09113
Self-citationAre We Ready For An Agent-Native Memory System?
Zhou, W., Zhou, X., Han, S., Xu, H., Li, G., Li, Z., Xiong, F., & Wu, F. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.24775
Self-GC: Self-Governing Context for Long-Horizon LLM Agents
Hao, X., Meng, H., Yin, X., Zhu, J., & Cao, C. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.00692
When Continual Learning Moves to Memory: A Study of Experience Reuse in LLM Agents
Hu, Q., Long, Q., & Wang, W. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.27003 · Cited by 19
Selective Forgetting: A Graph-Based Memory Framework for Long-Term LLM Agents
Rusu, T., Khanzadeh, S., & Alalfi, M. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.28978
Chain-of-Memory: Lightweight Memory Construction with Dynamic Evolution for LLM Agents
Xu, X., Xu, B., Xueyun, T., Huang, Z., Chen, R., Yunfan, L., & Shen, H. (2026) · Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.534
MemMorph: Tool Hijacking in LLM Agents via Memory Poisoning
Zhang, X., Zheng, Y., Xu, Z., Zhou, K., Shen, B., Ou, H., Zhang, T., & Lam, K.-Y. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.26154
Żatuchin, D. (2026) · Research Square (preprint) · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9801639/v1
EvoFlow: Evolving Diverse Agentic Workflows On The Fly
Zhang, G., Chen, K., Wan, G., Chang, H., Cheng, H., Wang, K., Hu, S., & Bai, L. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.07373
A Survey of Agent Memory in the Second Half: Towards Self-Evolving and Long-Horizon Agents
Huang, W.-C., Zhang, W., Liang, Y., Bei, Y., Chen, Y., Feng, T., Pan, X., Tan, Z., Wang, Y., Wei, T., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.06052 · Cited by 70
Self-citationEvo-Harness: Context-to-Harness Skill Compilation for Self-Evolving Agents
Wei, T., Shi, Z., Lin, M., He, B., Liu, Z., Sang, Y., Bei, Y., Ning, X., Zou, J., Li, T.-W., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.15071
Bhardwaj, V. P. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.02240 · Cited by 13
Locomo-Plus: Beyond-Factual Cognitive Memory Evaluation Framework for LLM Agents
Li, Y., Guo, W., Zhang, L., Xu, R., Huang, M., Liu, H., Xu, L., Xu, Y., & Liu, J. (2026) · Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.1150
Mao, W., Tan, H., Liu, S., Liu, H., Xu, Y., Ji, H., & Wang, X. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.06490
FinPerMA: A Theory-Informed, Event-Grounded Personalized-Memory Benchmark for LLM Agents
Wang, B., Zhou, K., Guo, L., Chen, F., & Zhang, C. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.04095 · Cited by 4
Self-citationSynapse: Empowering LLM Agents with Episodic-Semantic Memory via Spreading Activation
Jiang, H., Chen, J., Pan, Y., Chen, L., You, W., Zhou, Y., Zhang, R., Abate, Y., & Liu, T. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026 · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-acl.1108
Multi-agent Architecture Search via Agentic Supernet
Zhang, G., Niu, L., Fang, J., Wang, K., Bai, L., & Wang, X. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.04180
Yu, Y., Yao, L., Xie, Y., Tan, Q., Feng, J., Li, Y., & Wu, L. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.01885
Memory Matters More: Event-Centric Memory as a Logic Map for Agent Searching and Reasoning
Hu, Y., Liu, J., Tan, J., Zhu, Y., & Dou, Z. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026 · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-acl.1123
LoCoMo-Plus: Beyond-Factual Cognitive Memory Evaluation Framework for LLM Agents
Li, Y., Guo, W., Zhang, L., Xu, R., Huang, M., Liu, H., Xu, L., Xu, Y., & Liu, J. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.10715
Memp: Exploring Agent Procedural Memory
Fang, R., Liang, Y., Wang, X., Wu, J., Qiao, S., Xie, P., Huang, F., Chen, H., & Zhang, N. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026 · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-acl.866 · Cited by 174
Lightweight LLM Agent Memory with Small Language Models
Zhang, J., Zhang, C., Chen, S., Huang, Z., Zheng, P., Wang, Z., Guo, P., Mo, F., Bae, S.-H., Zou, J., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.07798
All-Mem: Agentic Lifelong Memory via Dynamic Topology Evolution
Lv, C., Chang, H., Tao, S., Chen, M., Fan, Z., Zhang, Z., Guo, Y., & Zhou, S. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.19595 · Cited by 11
HeLa-Mem: Hebbian Learning and Associative Memory for LLM Agents
Zhu, J., Li, J., Zhang, C., Liu, J., & Yang, M. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.16839
Forouzandeh, S., Peng, W., Moradi, P., Yu, X., & Jalili, M. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.18950 · Cited by 16
MAPLE-Guard: Memory-Aware Link Enforcement Against Memory-Link Poisoning in Multi-Agent Systems
Xiong, W., Zhou, Y., Wang, J., Gu, S., Tang, B., Li, Z., Xiong, F., Wen, Y., & Wen, M. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.00426 · Cited by 2
Hippocampus: An Efficient and Scalable Memory Module for Agentic AI
Li, Y., Cao, L., Ahmed, F., Sharma, P., & Li, B. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.13594
PREPING: Zero-Task Agent Memory Construction via Self-Practice
Choi, Y., Park, S., Kang, M., Baek, J., & Hwang, S. J. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.13880
A Responsive Present, a Shared Past, a Social Other: Teens' Overreliance on Companion AI Chatbots
Namvarpour, M., Chang, T., & Razi, A. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2609.14843
AutoPal: Autonomous Adaptation to Users for Personal AI Companionship
Cheng, Y., Liu, W., Xu, K., Hou, W., Ouyang, Y., Leong, C. T., Li, W., Wu, X., & Zheng, Y. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.13960 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Zhong, W., Guo, L., Gao, Q., Ye, H., & Wang, Y.
- Affiliations
- Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
- Harbin Institute of Technology (CN)
- KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 19724-19731
- ISSN
- 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2305.10250
- OpenAlex
- W4393147158
- Cited by
- 253
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 133 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 74.02
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- AAAI Publications (The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- long-term memory, large language models, Ebbinghaus forgetting curve, AI companions, chatbots, empathy, psychological counseling, memory retrieval
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
