PreprintCited by 65Topic ModelingAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningNatural Language Processing Techniques

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

MemInsight: Autonomous Memory Augmentation for LLM Agents

Open access
Salama, Rana, Cai, Jason, Yuan, Michelle, Currey, Anna, Sunkara, Monica, Zhang, Yi, Benajiba, Yassine·2025·arXiv

Abstract

Large language model (LLM) agents have evolved to intelligently process information, make decisions, and interact with users or tools. A key capability is the integration of long-term memory capabilities, enabling these agents to draw upon historical interactions and knowledge. However, the growing memory size and need for semantic structuring pose significant challenges. In this work, we propose an autonomous memory augmentation approach, MemInsight, to enhance semantic data representation and retrieval mechanisms. By leveraging autonomous augmentation to historical interactions, LLM agents are shown to deliver more accurate and contextualized responses. We empirically validate the efficacy of our proposed approach in three task scenarios; conversational recommendation, question answering and event summarization. On the LLM-REDIAL dataset, MemInsight boosts persuasiveness of recommendations by up to 14%. Moreover, it outperforms a RAG baseline by 34% in recall for LoCoMo retrieval. Our empirical results show the potential of MemInsight to enhance the contextual performance of LLM agents across multiple tasks.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2503.21760

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Recent studies augment LLMs with explicit external memory modules, most of which adopt the retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) paradigm, appending retrieved memory entries to the model's input prompt.

    “Recent studies augment LLMs with explicit external memory modules (Zhang et al., 2024), most of which adopt the retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) paradigm (Pan et al., 2025; Salama et al., 2025), appending retrieved memory entries to the model's input prompt.”

    From Memory-R1: Enhancing Large Language Model Agents to Manage and Utilize Memories via Reinforcement Learning (2025) · cites this paper as Salama et al., 2025

    Related Work (p. 2) describes retrieval as a common approach to LLM-agent memory, and §5.1 (p. 5) says MemInsight integrates retrieved dialogue turns into the current context to generate an answer. The paper also identifies a RAG baseline (§5.1, p. 5), but it does not establish that most external-memory methods adopt RAG or specifically append entries to the input prompt. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The necessity of temporal validity propels the evolution of memory mechanisms from static storage toward active management, integrating temporal awareness, decay policies, and flexible retrieval.

    “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 Salama et al., 2025

    The Introduction (p. 1) argues that accumulating interactions require effective memory management, and §3.2 (p. 4) describes flexible, context-aware retrieval methods. These passages support a move beyond static storage, but the paper does not establish temporal validity as its driver or describe decay policies or temporal-awareness mechanisms. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Petr Anokhin, Nikita Semenov, Artyom Sorokin, Dmitry Evseev, Mikhail Burtsev, and Evgeny Burnaev. 2024. Arigraph: Learning knowledge graph world models with episodic memory for llm agents. Preprint , arXiv:2407.04363. · arXiv
  2. Prateek Chhikara, Dev Khant, Saket Aryan, Taranjeet Singh, and Deshraj Yadav. 2025. Mem0: Building production-ready ai agents with scalable long-term memory. Preprint , arXiv:2504.19413. · arXiv
  3. Yuki Hou, Haruki Tamoto, and Homei Miyashita. 2024. 'my agent understands me better': Integrating dynamic human-like memory recall and consolidation in llm-based agents. In Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , page 1-7. ACM.
  4. Chenxu Hu, Jie Fu, Chenzhuang Du, Simian Luo, Junbo Zhao, and Hang Zhao. 2023a. Chatdb: Augmenting llms with databases as their symbolic memory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03901 . · arXiv
  5. Chenxu Hu, Jie Fu, Chenzhuang Du, Simian Luo, Junbo Zhao, and Hang Zhao. 2023b. Chatdb: Augmenting llms with databases as their symbolic memory. Preprint , arXiv:2306.03901. · arXiv
  6. Mengkang Hu, Tianxing Chen, Qiguang Chen, Yao Mu, Wenqi Shao, and Ping Luo. 2024. Hiagent: Hierarchical working memory management for solving long-horizon agent tasks with large language model. Preprint , arXiv:2408.09559. · arXiv
  7. Jeff Johnson, Matthijs Douze, and Hervé Jégou. 2017. Billion-scale similarity search with gpus. Preprint , arXiv:1702.08734. · arXiv
  8. Vladimir Karpukhin, Barlas O˘ guz, Sewon Min, Patrick Lewis, Ledell Wu, Sergey Edunov, Danqi Chen, and Wen tau Yih. 2020. Dense passage retrieval for open-domain question answering. Preprint , arXiv:2004.04906. · arXiv
  9. Kuang-Huei Lee, Xinyun Chen, Hiroki Furuta, John Canny, and Ian Fischer. 2024. A human-inspired reading agent with gist memory of very long contexts. Preprint , arXiv:2402.09727. · arXiv
  10. Tingting Liang, Chenxin Jin, Lingzhi Wang, Wenqi Fan, Congying Xia, Kai Chen, and Yuyu Yin. 2024. LLMREDIAL: A large-scale dataset for conversational recommender systems created from user behaviors with LLMs. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024 , pages 8926-8939, Bangkok, Thailand. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  11. Lei Liu, Xiaoyan Yang, Yue Shen, Binbin Hu, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jinjie Gu, and Guannan Zhang. 2023a. Think-in-memory: Recalling and post-thinking enable llms with long-term memory. Preprint , arXiv:2311.08719. · arXiv
  12. Yang Liu, Dan Iter, Yichong Xu, Shuohang Wang, Ruochen Xu, and Chenguang Zhu. 2023b. G-eval: Nlg evaluation using gpt-4 with better human alignment. Preprint , arXiv:2303.16634. · arXiv
  13. Adyasha Maharana, Dong-Ho Lee, Sergey Tulyakov, Mohit Bansal, Francesco Barbieri, and Yuwei Fang. 2024. Evaluating very long-term conversational memory of llm agents. Preprint , arXiv:2402.17753. · arXiv
  14. Charles Packer, Sarah Wooders, Kevin Lin, Vivian Fang, Shishir G. Patil, Ion Stoica, and Joseph E. Gonzalez. 2024. Memgpt: Towards llms as operating systems. Preprint , arXiv:2310.08560. · arXiv
  15. Gustavo Penha, Ali Vardasbi, Enrico Palumbo, Marco de Nadai, and Hugues Bouchard. 2024. Bridging search and recommendation in generative retrieval: Does one task help the other? Preprint , arXiv:2410.16823. · arXiv
  16. Jihoon Tack, Jaehyung Kim, Eric Mitchell, Jinwoo Shin, Yee Whye Teh, and Jonathan Richard Schwarz. 2024. Online adaptation of language models with a memory of amortized contexts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.04317 . · arXiv
  17. Zhengyang Tang, Ziniu Li, Zhenyang Xiao, Tian Ding, Ruoyu Sun, Benyou Wang, Dayiheng Liu, Fei Huang, Tianyu Liu, Bowen Yu, and Junyang Lin. 2025. Enabling scalable oversight via self-evolving critic. Preprint , arXiv:2501.05727. · arXiv
  18. Junlin Wang, Jue Wang, Ben Athiwaratkun, Ce Zhang, and James Zou. 2024a. Mixture-of-agents enhances large language model capabilities. Preprint , arXiv:2406.04692. · arXiv
  19. Qineng Wang, Zihao Wang, Ying Su, Hanghang Tong, and Yangqiu Song. 2024c. Rethinking the bounds of llm reasoning: Are multi-agent discussions the key? Preprint , arXiv:2402.18272. · arXiv
  20. Qineng Wang, Zihao Wang, Ying Su, Hanghang Tong, and Yangqiu Song. 2024d. Rethinking the bounds of llm reasoning: Are multi-agent discussions the key? Preprint , arXiv:2402.18272. · arXiv
  21. Qineng Wang, Zihao Wang, Ying Su, Hanghang Tong, and Yangqiu Song. 2024e. Rethinking the bounds of llm reasoning: Are multi-agent discussions the key? Preprint , arXiv:2402.18272. · arXiv
  22. Zora Zhiruo Wang, Jiayuan Mao, Daniel Fried, and Graham Neubig. 2024f. Agent workflow memory. Preprint , arXiv:2409.07429. · arXiv
  23. Wujiang Xu, Kai Mei, Hang Gao, Juntao Tan, Zujie Liang, and Yongfeng Zhang. 2025. A-mem: Agentic memory for llm agents. Preprint , arXiv:2502.12110. · arXiv
  24. Yixin Yang, Zheng Li, Qingxiu Dong, Heming Xia, and Zhifang Sui. 2024. Can large multimodal models uncover deep semantics behind images? Preprint , arXiv:2402.11281. · arXiv
  25. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. 2023. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. Preprint , arXiv:2210.03629. · arXiv
  26. Zeyu Zhang, Xiaohe Bo, Chen Ma, Rui Li, Xu Chen, Quanyu Dai, Jieming Zhu, Zhenhua Dong, and JiRong Wen. 2024. A survey on the memory mechanism of large language model based agents. Preprint , arXiv:2404.13501. · arXiv
  27. Andrew Zhao, Daniel Huang, Quentin Xu, Matthieu Lin, Yong-Jin Liu, and Gao Huang. 2024a. Expel: Llm agents are experiential learners. Preprint , arXiv:2308.10144. · arXiv
  28. Andrew Zhao, Daniel Huang, Quentin Xu, Matthieu Lin, Yong-Jin Liu, and Gao Huang. 2024b. Expel: Llm agents are experiential learners. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pages 19632-19642.
  29. Wanjun Zhong, Lianghong Guo, Qiqi Gao, He Ye, and Yanlin Wang. 2023. Memorybank: Enhancing large language models with long-term memory. Preprint , arXiv:2305.10250. · arXiv
  30. Xizhou Zhu, Yuntao Chen, Hao Tian, Chenxin Tao, Weijie Su, Chenyu Yang, Gao Huang, Bin Li, Lewei Lu, Xiaogang Wang, Yu Qiao, Zhaoxiang Zhang, and Jifeng Dai. 2023. Ghost in the minecraft: Generally capable agents for open-world environments via large language models with text-based knowledge and memory. Preprint , arXiv:2305.17144. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Salama, R., Cai, J., Yuan, M., Currey, A., Sunkara, M., Zhang, Y., & Benajiba, Y.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
Pages
33124-33140
OpenAlex
W4416035339
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1
FWCI
5.69
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
memory enhancement, LLM agents

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