Learning to Remember: End-to-End Training of Memory Agents for Long-Context Reasoning
Open accessAbstract
Long-context LLMs and Retrieval-Augmented Generation defer state tracking and evidence consolidation to query time, which is brittle when facts evolve and answers depend on latent states. We introduce Unified Memory Agent (UMA) for a one-to-many setting: query-agnostic external memory is constructed once from a stream and reused across multiple future QA sessions. A single policy maintains a structured Memory Bank through CRUD operations and answers using both the Memory Bank and raw context. Task-Stratified GRPO uses the mean reward of QA trajectories branching from each sampled memory state to supervise memory maintenance, while normalizing memory and per-question QA groups separately. We also introduce Ledger-QA, a diagnostic benchmark for long-horizon state tracking over accumulated updates. At the 16k budget, UMA-Generalist achieves the highest average score among compared methods across the test-time-learning and accurate-retrieval benchmarks and transfers to Ledger-QA without task-specific training; UMA-Specialist further improves long-horizon tracking after task adaptation. These results support learned proactive memory management for long-context reasoning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Prior work leaves open a write-time correctness specification with named predicates and soundness theorems.
“They leave open a write-time correctness specification with named predicates and soundness theorems.”
From TOKI: A Bitemporal Operator Algebra for Contradiction Resolution in LLM-Agent Persistent Memory (2026) · cites this paper as [82]
Cites
MEM1: Learning to Synergize Memory and Reasoning for Efficient Long-Horizon Agents
Zhou, Z., Qu, A., Wu, Z., Kim, S., Prakash, A., Rus, D., Zhao, J., Low, B. K. H., & Liang, P. P. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.15841 · cited 2×
“These tasks demand high-precision information extraction from long documents or conversation histories.”
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
- Authors
- Zhang, K., Gui, S., Yang, S., Chen, W., & Feng, Y.
- Affiliations
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- ORCID
- Chen, Wei
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- Pages
- 29575-29599
- arXiv
- 2602.18493
- OpenAlex
- W7131283936
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (62376260)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Keywords
- memory agents, long-context reasoning, external memory, state tracking, memory bank, retrieval-augmented generation, memory maintenance, large language models
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