PreprintCited by 2Speech and dialogue systemsAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningNatural Language Processing Techniques

Mem2ActBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Term Memory Utilization in Task-Oriented Autonomous Agents

Open access

Abstract

Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents are increasingly deployed for complex, tool-based tasks where long-term memory is critical to driving actions. Existing benchmarks, however, primarily test a angent's ability to passively retrieve isolated facts in response to explicit questions. They fail to evaluate the more crucial capability of actively applying memory to execute tasks. To address this gap, we introduce \textsc{Mem2ActBench}, a benchmark for evaluating whether agents can proactively leverage long-term memory to execute tool-based actions by selecting appropriate tools and grounding their parameters. The benchmark simulates persistent assistant usage, where users mention the same topic across long, interrupted interactions and expect previously established preferences and task states to be implicitly applied. We build the dataset with an automated pipeline that merges heterogeneous sources (ToolACE, BFCL, Oasst1), resolves conflicts via consistency modeling, and synthesizes 2,029 sessions with 12 user--assistant--tool turns on average. From these memory chains, a reverse-generation method produces 400 tool-use tasks, with human evaluation confirming 91.3\% are strongly memory-dependent. Experiments on seven memory frameworks show that current systems remain inadequate at actively utilizing memory for parameter grounding, highlighting the need for more effective approaches to evaluate and improve memory application in task execution.

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.2601.19935

Cites

Statistics

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

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Jianlyu Chen, Shitao Xiao, Peitian Zhang, Kun Luo, Defu Lian, and Zheng Liu. 2024. M3embedding: Multi-linguality, multi-functionality, multi-granularity text embeddings through selfknowledge distillation. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 , pages 2318-2335.
  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. Maarten Grootendorst. 2022. Bertopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based tf-idf procedure. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05794 . · arXiv
  4. Yuanzhe Hu, Yu Wang, and Julian McAuley. 2025. Evaluating memory in llm agents via incremental multi-turn interactions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.05257 . · arXiv
  5. Jiho Kim, Woosog Chay, Hyeonji Hwang, Daeun Kyung, Hyunseung Chung, Eunbyeol Cho, Yeonsu Kwon, Yohan Jo, and Edward Choi. 2025. Dialsim: A dialogue simulator for evaluating longterm multi-party dialogue understanding of conversational agents. Preprint , arXiv:2406.13144. · arXiv
  6. Andreas Köpf, Yannic Kilcher, Dimitri Von Rütte, Sotiris Anagnostidis, Zhi Rui Tam, Keith Stevens, Abdullah Barhoum, Duc Nguyen, Oliver Stanley, Richárd Nagyfi, and 1 others. 2023. Openassistant conversations-democratizing large language model alignment. Advances in neural information processing systems , 36:47669-47681.
  7. Nelson F. Liu, Kevin Lin, John Hewitt, Ashwin Paranjape, Michele Bevilacqua, Fabio Petroni, and Percy Liang. 2024. Lost in the middle: How language models use long contexts. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics , 12:157-173.
  8. Weiwen Liu, Xu Huang, Xingshan Zeng, xinlong hao, Shuai Yu, Dexun Li, Shuai Wang, Weinan Gan, Zhengying Liu, Yuanqing Yu, Zezhong WANG, Yuxian Wang, Wu Ning, Yutai Hou, Bin Wang, Chuhan Wu, Wang Xinzhi, Yong Liu, Yasheng Wang, and 8 others. 2025. Toolace: Winning the points of llm function calling. In International Conference on Representation Learning , volume 2025, pages 41359-41381.
  9. Adyasha Maharana, Dong-Ho Lee, Sergey Tulyakov, Mohit Bansal, Francesco Barbieri, and Yuwei Fang. 2024. Evaluating very long-term conversational memory of llm agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.17753 . · arXiv
  10. Ali Modarressi, Ayyoob Imani, Mohsen Fayyaz, and Hinrich Schütze. 2024. Ret-llm: Towards a general read-write memory for large language models. Preprint , arXiv:2305.14322. · arXiv
  11. 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
  12. 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.
  13. Shishir G. Patil, Huanzhi Mao, Charlie Cheng-Jie Ji, Fanjia Yan, Vishnu Suresh, Ion Stoica, and Joseph E. Gonzalez. 2025. The berkeley function calling leaderboard (bfcl): From tool use to agentic evaluation of large language models. In Forty-second International Conference on Machine Learning .
  14. Alireza Rezazadeh, Zichao Li, Wei Wei, and Yujia Bao. 2024. From isolated conversations to hierarchical schemas: Dynamic tree memory representation for llms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14052 . · arXiv
  15. Bing Wang, Xinnian Liang, Jian Yang, Hui Huang, Shuangzhi Wu, Peihao Wu, Lu Lu, Zejun Ma, and Zhoujun Li. 2023. Scm: Enhancing large language model with self-controlled memory framework. arXiv e-prints , pages arXiv-2304.
  16. Di Wu, Hongwei Wang, Wenhao Yu, Yuwei Zhang, Kai-Wei Chang, and Dong Yu. 2024. Longmemeval: Benchmarking chat assistants on long-term interactive memory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.10813 . · arXiv
  17. Jing Xu, Arthur Szlam, and Jason Weston. 2022. Beyond goldfish memory: Long-term open-domain conversation. In Proceedings of the 60th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (volume 1: long papers) , pages 5180-5197.
  18. Wujiang Xu, Zujie Liang, Kai Mei, Hang Gao, Juntao Tan, and Yongfeng Zhang. 2025. Amem: Agentic memory for llm agents. Preprint , arXiv:2502.12110. · arXiv
  19. Sanae Yamashita, Koji Inoue, Ao Guo, Shota Mochizuki, Tatsuya Kawahara, and Ryuichiro Higashinaka. 2023. Realpersonachat: A realistic persona chat corpus with interlocutors own personalities. In Proceedings of the 37th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation , pages 852-861.
  20. 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.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shen, Y., Li, K., Zhou, W., & Hu, S.
Affiliations
Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7126100092
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
long-term memory, LLM agents, tool use, benchmark, memory assessment

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