The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
How Memory Management Impacts LLM Agents: An Empirical Study of Experience-Following Behavior
Open accessAbstract
Memory is a critical component in large language model (LLM)-based agents, enabling them to store and retrieve past executions to improve task performance over time. In this paper, we conduct an empirical study on how memory management choices impact the LLM agents' behavior, especially their long-term performance. Specifically, we focus on two fundamental memory management operations that are widely used by many agent frameworks-memory addition and deletion-to systematically study their impact on the agent behavior. Through our quantitative analysis, we find that LLM agents display an experience-following property: high similarity between a task input and the input in a retrieved memory record often results in highly similar agent outputs. Our analysis further reveals two significant challenges associated with this property: error propagation, where inaccuracies in past experiences compound and degrade future performance, and misaligned experience replay, where some seemingly correct executions can provide limited or even misleading value as experiences. Through controlled experiments, we demonstrate the importance of regulating experience quality within the memory bank and show that future task evaluations can serve as free quality labels for stored memory. Our findings offer insights into the behavioral dynamics of LLM agent memory systems and provide practical guidance for designing memory components that support robust, long-term agent performance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
LTM management approaches typically depend on handcrafted rules or auxiliary expert models, limiting adaptability and increasing system complexity.
“Despite offering more flexibility, most approaches still depend on handcrafted rules or auxiliary expert models, limiting adaptability and increasing system complexity (Xiong et al., 2025).”
From Agentic Memory: Learning Unified Long-Term and Short-Term Memory Management for Large Language Model Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2025
The Introduction (p. 1) and §2.2 (p. 3) say existing memory-management strategies are often tailored to specific tasks or agent types and lack a design that generalizes across systems, supporting the concern about limited adaptability. The paper describes model-based evaluators in §3.1 (p. 4), but our copy does not say that most approaches depend on handcrafted rules or auxiliary expert models, or that such dependence increases system complexity. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredLLM agents face fundamental limitations in long-horizon reasoning due to finite context windows, making effective memory management critical.
“Large language model (LLM) agents face fundamental limitations in long-horizon reasoning due to finite context windows, making effective memory management critical.”
From Agentic Memory: Learning Unified Long-Term and Short-Term Memory Management for Large Language Model Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2025
The Introduction (p. 1) says effective memory management can improve agents’ performance over time, and the Introduction (p. 2) emphasizes its importance for stable long-term performance. The cited paper does not attribute limitations in long-horizon reasoning to finite context windows; its discussion instead focuses on managing stored experiences. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe inherent statelessness of LLMs hinders agents from maintaining logical consistency across complex, multi-step tasks and precludes learning from prior interactions, often resulting in recurring reasoning errors.
“However, the inherent statelessness of LLMs poses a critical challenge: it hinders agents from maintaining logical consistency across complex, multi-step tasks and precludes learning from prior interactions, often resulting in recurring reasoning errors (Huang et al., 2023a; Xiong et al., 2025; Cao et al., 2026b).”
From From Storage to Experience: A Survey on the Evolution of LLM Agent Memory Mechanisms (2026) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2025
Section 2.1 (p. 2) says episodic memory can mitigate LLMs’ lack of latent learning capability, supporting the point about difficulty learning from prior interactions. Section 3.4 (p. 5) describes errors recurring across tasks when erroneous memories are retrieved and stored. The paper does not establish that inherent statelessness causes failures of logical consistency in complex, multi-step tasks; it attributes the error propagation it studies to noisy memory records. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredSome systems adopt CRUD-style operations (create, read, update, delete) adapted from databases.
“Some systems (Packer et al., 2023; Modarressi et al., 2024; Xiong et al., 2025) adopt CRUD-style operations, namely create, read, update, and delete, which are adapted from databases (Martin, 1983).”
From Memory-R1: Enhancing Large Language Model Agents to Manage and Utilize Memories via Reinforcement Learning (2025) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2025
Section 2.2 (p. 3) says memory management involves adding and deleting records, and the Introduction (p. 1) describes a dynamic retrieval pool. These support parts of the CRUD analogy, but the paper does not describe its system as adopting the full create–read–update–delete set, particularly an update operation. The database origin is attributed to Martin (1983), not to this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMemories characterized by a high degree of abstraction during the Experience phase enable agents to circumvent challenges frequently associated with conventional memory mechanisms.
“Memories characterized by a high degree of abstraction during the phase of experience also enable agents to circumvent challenges frequently associated with conventional memory mechanisms (Xiong et al., 2025; Gharat et al., 2025; Srivastava and He, 2025).”
From From Storage to Experience: A Survey on the Evolution of LLM Agent Memory Mechanisms (2026) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2025
The Introduction (p. 2) identifies challenges in using stored experiences, and §4.3 (p. 8) says evaluator-guided deletion can mitigate misaligned experience replay. The paper does not say that highly abstract memories overcome these challenges; its Limitations (p. 9) explicitly place summarization outside the mechanisms studied. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Most LTM approaches still depend on handcrafted rules or auxiliary expert models, limiting adaptability and increasing system complexity.
“Despite offering more flexibility, most approaches still depend on handcrafted rules or auxiliary expert models, limiting adaptability and increasing system complexity (Xiong et al., 2025).”
From Agentic Memory: Learning Unified Long-Term and Short-Term Memory Management for Large Language Model Agents (2026) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2025
The Introduction (p. 1) says existing memory-management approaches are often tailored to specific tasks, and §2.2 (p. 3) says they lack a design that generalizes across agentic systems. The paper discusses model-based evaluators in §3.1 (p. 4), but does not establish that most approaches depend on handcrafted rules or auxiliary expert models, or that such dependence increases system complexity. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredRecent research indicates that unrestricted expansion of memory is detrimental to the performance of LLM agents, as errors propagate within the memory system and contaminate the efficacy of learning.
“However, recent research indicates that the unrestricted expansion of memory is detrimental to the performance of LLM agents, as errors propagate within the system for memory and contaminate the efficacy of learning (Xiong et al., 2025; Srivastava and He, 2025).”
From From Storage to Experience: A Survey on the Evolution of LLM Agent Memory Mechanisms (2026) · cites this paper as Xiong et al., 2025
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
- 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. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.04363 . · arXiv
- Holger Caesar, Varun Bankiti, Alex H Lang, Sourabh Vora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Giancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom. 2020. nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 11621-11631.
- 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 , pages 1-7.
- 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. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.09559 . · arXiv
- Abhilasha Ashok Kumar. 2020. Semantic memory: A review of methods, models, and current challenges. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 28:40 - 80.
- Aditya Kusupati, Gantavya Bhatt, Aniket Rege, Matthew Wallingford, Aditya Sinha, Vivek Ramanujan, William Howard-Snyder, Kaifeng Chen, Sham Kakade, Prateek Jain, and 1 others. 2022. Matryoshka representation learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 35:30233-30249.
- Yang Li, Yangyang Yu, Haohang Li, Zhi Chen, and Khaldoun Khashanah. 2023. Tradinggpt: Multiagent system with layered memory and distinct characters for enhanced financial trading performance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.03736 . · arXiv
- Xuechen Liang, Yangfan He, Yinghui Xia, Xinyuan Song, Jianhui Wang, Meiling Tao, Li Sun, Xinhang Yuan, Jiayi Su, Keqin Li, and 1 others. 2024. Self-evolving agents with reflective and memory-augmented abilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.00872 . · arXiv
- Lei Liu, Xiaoyan Yang, Yue Shen, Binbin Hu, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jinjie Gu, and Guannan Zhang. 2023. Thinkin-memory: Recalling and post-thinking enable llms with long-term memory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.08719 . · arXiv
- Man Luo, Xin Xu, Yue Liu, Panupong Pasupat, and Mehran Kazemi. 2024. In-context learning with retrieved demonstrations for language models: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.11624 . · arXiv
- Jiageng Mao, Junjie Ye, Yuxi Qian, Marco Pavone, and Yue Wang. 2024. A language agent for autonomous driving. In First Conference on Language Modeling .
- Andrew Nuxoll and John E. Laird. 2007. Extending cognitive architecture with episodic memory. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence .
- Jiayi Pan, Yichi Zhang, Nicholas Tomlin, Yifei Zhou, Sergey Levine, and Alane Suhr. 2024. Autonomous evaluation and refinement of digital agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.06474 . · arXiv
- Zhuoshi Pan, Qianhui Wu, Huiqiang Jiang, Xufang Luo, Hao Cheng, Dongsheng Li, Yuqing Yang, ChinYew Lin, H Vicky Zhao, Lili Qiu, and 1 others. 2025. On memory construction and retrieval for personalized conversational agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05589 . · arXiv
- Joon Sung Park, Joseph O'Brien, Carrie Jun Cai, Meredith Ringel Morris, Percy Liang, and Michael S Bernstein. 2023. Generative agents: Interactive simulacra of human behavior. In Proceedings of the 36th annual acm symposium on user interface software and technology , pages 1-22.
- Wenqi Shi, Ran Xu, Yuchen Zhuang, Yue Yu, Jieyu Zhang, Hang Wu, Yuanda Zhu, Joyce Ho, Carl Yang, and May D Wang. 2024. Ehragent: Code empowers large language models for complex tabular reasoning on electronic health records. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.07128 . · arXiv
- Noah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan, and Shunyu Yao. 2024. Reflexion: Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 36.
- Guanzhi Wang, Yuqi Xie, Yunfan Jiang, Ajay Mandlekar, Chaowei Xiao, Yuke Zhu, Linxi Fan, and Anima Anandkumar. 2023. Voyager: An open-ended embodied agent with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16291 . · arXiv
- Lei Wang, Chen Ma, Xueyang Feng, Zeyu Zhang, Hao Yang, Jingsen Zhang, Zhiyuan Chen, Jiakai Tang, Xu Chen, Yankai Lin, and 1 others. 2024a. A survey on large language model based autonomous agents. Frontiers of Computer Science , 18(6):186345.
- Zhiruo Wang, Daniel Fried, and Graham Neubig. 2024b. Trove: Inducing verifiable and efficient toolboxes for solving programmatic tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.12869 . · arXiv
- Zora Zhiruo Wang, Jiayuan Mao, Daniel Fried, and Graham Neubig. 2025. Agent workflow memory. In Forty-second International Conference on Machine Learning .
- Zhen Xiang, Linzhi Zheng, Yanjie Li, Junyuan Hong, Qinbin Li, Han Xie, Jiawei Zhang, Zidi Xiong, Chulin Xie, Carl Yang, and 1 others. 2024. Guardagent: Safeguard llm agents by a guard agent via knowledge-enabled reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09187 . · arXiv
- Wujiang Xu, Kai Mei, Hang Gao, Juntao Tan, Zujie Liang, and Yongfeng Zhang. 2025. A-mem: Agentic memory for llm agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.12110 . · arXiv
- Zhangyue Yin, Qiushi Sun, Qipeng Guo, Zhiyuan Zeng, Qinyuan Cheng, Xipeng Qiu, and Xuan-Jing Huang. 2024. Explicit memory learning with expectation maximization. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages 16618-16635.
- Ruihong Zeng, Jinyuan Fang, Siwei Liu, and Zaiqiao Meng. 2024. On the structural memory of llm agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.15266 . · arXiv
- 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. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.13501 . · arXiv
- Andrew Zhao, Daniel Huang, Quentin Xu, Matthieu Lin, Yong-Jin Liu, and Gao Huang. 2024. Expel: Llm agents are experiential learners. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume 38, pages 19632-19642.
- Longtao Zheng, Rundong Wang, Xinrun Wang, and Bo An. 2024. Synapse: Trajectory-as-exemplar prompting with memory for computer control. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations .
- Wanjun Zhong, Lianghong Guo, Qiqi Gao, He Ye, and Yanlin Wang. 2024. Memorybank: Enhancing large language models with long-term memory. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , volume 38, pages 19724-19731.
- Huichi Zhou, Yihang Chen, Siyuan Guo, Xue Yan, Kin Hei Lee, Zihan Wang, Ka Yiu Lee, Guchun Zhang, Kun Shao, Linyi Yang, and 1 others. 2025. Agentfly: Fine-tuning llm agents without fine-tuning llms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.16153 . · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Remember Me, Refine Me: A Dynamic Procedural Memory Framework for Experience-Driven Agent Evolution
Cao, Z., Deng, J., Yu, L., Zhou, W., Liu, Z., Ding, B., & Zhao, H. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026 · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-acl.829 · Cited by 2
Self-citationFrom Storage to Experience: A Survey on the Evolution of LLM Agent Memory Mechanisms
Luo, J., Tian, Y., Cao, C., Luo, Z., Lin, H., Li, K., Kong, C., Yang, R., & Ma, J. (2026) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026 · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.findings-acl.2069 · Cited by 3
“However, recent research indicates that the unrestricted expansion of memory is detrimental to the performance of LLM agents, as errors propagate within the sys-tem for memory and contaminate the efficacy of learning (Xiong et al., 2025; Srivastava and He, 2025).”
Yan, S., Yang, X., Huang, Z., Nie, E., Ding, Z., Li, Z., Ma, X., Bi, J., Kersting, K., Pan, J. Z., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.19828 · Cited by 297
“Some systems (Packer et al., 2023; Modarressi et al., 2024; Xiong et al., 2025) adopt CRUD-style operations, namely create, read, update, and delete, which are adapted from databases (Martin, 1983).”
Yu, Y., Yao, L., Xie, Y., Tan, Q., Feng, J., Li, Y., & Wu, L. (2026) · Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.acl-long.981 · Cited by 4
Sun, X., Wang, Q., Li, H., & Chen, L. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2608.03137
“Stored information, however, affects a decision only after it enters the active context at the right time, and reusing task-misaligned experience can propagate errors (Xiong et al., 2026).”
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
“Recent work also studies cross-task reuse and memory-side failure modes (Li et al., 2025; Xiong et al., 2025).”
Yu, Y., Yao, L., Xie, Y., Tan, Q., Feng, J., Li, Y., & Wu, L. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2601.01885
“Despite offering more flexibility, most approaches still depend on handcrafted rules or auxiliary expert models, limiting adaptability and increasing system complexity (Xiong et al., 2025).”
RCR-Router: Efficient Role-Aware Context Routing for Multi-Agent LLM Systems with Structured Memory
Liu, J., Kong, Z., Yang, C., Yang, F., Li, T., Dong, P., Nanjekye, J., Tang, H., Yuan, G., Niu, W., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.04903
“HMMI (Xiong et al. 2025) highlights how memory management choices affect agents’ behavior under challenging conditions such as task distribution shifts and constrained memory resources (Liu et al. 2024b, 2023a).”
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
Memory Management and Contextual Consistency for Long-Running Low-Code Agents
Xu, J., & Lu, Q. (2026) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-20746-3_32 · Cited by 1
Kasneci, G., & Kasneci, E. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-026-01132-0 · Cited by 1
Shimomoto, T. (2026) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.20379919
The Compaction Cliff in Long-Running AI Agent Memory
Zerhoudi, S., Mitrović, J., & Granitzer, M. (2026) · ACM · doi:10.1145/3799682.3840567 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Xiong, Z., Lin, Y., Xie, W., He, P., Liu, Z., Tang, J., Lakkaraju, H., & Xiang, Z.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Michigan State University (US)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- University of Georgia (US)
- ORCID
- Lakkaraju, Himabindu
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2505.16067
- OpenAlex
- W6948008621
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- LLM agents, memory management, experience replay, error propagation, memory quality, memory retrieval, agent behavior
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
