Governed Memory: A Production Architecture for Multi-Agent Workflows
Open accessAbstract
Enterprise AI deploys dozens of autonomous agent nodes across workflows, each acting on the same entities with no shared memory and no common governance. We identify five structural challenges arising from this memory governance gap: memory silos across agent workflows; governance fragmentation across teams and tools; unstructured memories unusable by downstream systems; redundant context delivery in autonomous multi-step executions; and silent quality degradation without feedback loops. We present Governed Memory, a shared memory and governance layer addressing this gap through four mechanisms: a dual memory model combining open-set atomic facts with schema-enforced typed properties; tiered governance routing with progressive context delivery; reflection-bounded retrieval with entity-scoped isolation; and a closed-loop schema lifecycle with AI-assisted authoring and automated per-property refinement. We validate each mechanism through controlled experiments (N=250, five content types): 99.6% fact recall with complementary dual-modality coverage; 92% governance routing precision; 50% token reduction from progressive delivery; zero cross-entity leakage across 500 adversarial queries; 100% adversarial governance compliance; and output quality saturation at approximately seven governed memories per entity. On the LoCoMo benchmark, the architecture achieves 74.8% overall accuracy, confirming that governance and schema enforcement impose no retrieval quality penalty. The system is in production at Personize.ai.
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
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?
Governed memory systems (Governed Memory, SSGM, Oracle AI Agent Memory, AgentGuardian) govern access to a memory entry as a whole by owner, role, or tool-call legitimacy rather than by individual contributing columns, so none can tell that a permitted entry embeds a forbidden column.
“What all four have in common is that they govern access to a memory entry as a whole - by owner, role, or tool-call legitimacy - rather than by the individual columns that contributed to it. That means none of them can tell that a permitted entry embeds a forbidden column.”
From Lineage-Aware Memory Governance: A Derivation-Gated Framework for Privacy-Preserving Column-Level Access Control in Enterprise AI Agents (2026) · cites this paper as [7]
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
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.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- P. Lewis, E. Perez, A. Piktus, F. Petroni, V. Karpukhin, N. Goyal, H. Kuttler, M. Lewis, W.-T. Yih, T. Rocktaschel, S. Riedel, and D. Kiela. Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks. In NeurIPS, 2020.
- N. Shinn, F. Cassano, A. Gopinath, K. Narasimhan, and S. Yao. Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning. In NeurIPS, 2023.
- A. Asai, Z. Wu, Y. Wang, A. Sil, and H. Hajishirzi. Self-RAG: Learning to Retrieve, Generate, and Critique through Self-Reflection. In ICLR, 2024.
- N. F. Liu, K. Lin, J. Hewitt, A. Paranjape, M. Bevilacqua, F. Petroni, and P. Liang. Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts. TACL, 12:157-173, 2024.
- S. Borgeaud et al. Improving Language Models by Retrieving from Trillions of Tokens. In ICML, 2022.
- Y. Gao et al. Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey. arXiv:2312.10997, 2023. · arXiv
- J. S. Park, J. C. O'Brien, C. J. Cai, M. R. Morris, P. Liang, and M. S. Bernstein. Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior. In UIST, 2023.
- S. Yao, J. Zhao, D. Yu, N. Du, I. Shafran, K. Narasimhan, and Y. Cao. ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models. In ICLR, 2023.
- C. Packer, S. Wooders, K. Lin, V. Fang, S. G. Patil, I. Stoica, and J. E. Gonzalez. MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systems. arXiv:2310.08560, 2023. · arXiv
- W. Zhong, L. Guo, Q. Gao, H. Ye, and Y. Wang. MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memory. In AAAI, 2024.
- S.-Q. Yan, J.-C. Gu, Y. Zhu, and Z.-H. Ling. Corrective Retrieval Augmented Generation. arXiv:2401.15884, 2024. · arXiv
- L. Zheng et al. Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena. In NeurIPS, 2023.
- S. Es, J. James, L. Espinosa-Anke, and S. Schockaert. RAGAS: Automated Evaluation of Retrieval Augmented Generation. In EACL, 2024.
- S. Kadavath et al. Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know. arXiv:2207.05221, 2022. · arXiv
- J. Liu, Y. Su, P. Xia, S. Han, Z. Zheng, C. Xie, M. Ding, and H. Yao. SimpleMem: Efficient Lifelong Memory for LLM Agents. arXiv:2601.02553, 2026. · arXiv
- P. Chhikara, D. Khant, S. Aryan, T. Singh, and D. Yadav. Mem0: Building Production- Ready AI Agents with Scalable Long-Term Memory. arXiv:2504.19413, 2025. · arXiv
- S. Wang, Y. Zhou, and Y. Fang. BookRAG: A Hierarchical Structure-aware Index-based Approach for Retrieval-Augmented Generation. arXiv:2512.03413, 2025. · arXiv
- E. Lumer et al. Rethinking Retrieval: From Traditional RAG to Agentic and Non-Vector Reasoning Systems in the Financial Domain. arXiv:2511.18177, 2025. · arXiv
- Z. Li, H. Tian, L. Luo, Y. Cao, and P. Luo. DeepRead: Document Structure-Aware Reasoning to Enhance Agentic Search. arXiv:2602.05014, 2026. · arXiv
- A. Maharana, D. Lee, S. Tulyakov, M. Bansal, F. Barbieri, and Y. Fung. Evaluating Very Long-Term Conversational Memory of LLM Agents. In ACL, 2024.
- D. Jha, M. Gupta, D. Ganguly, and V. Varma. ENGRAM: Efficient Graph-Enhanced Memory Networks for Long-Term Conversational Agents. arXiv:2511.12960, 2025. · arXiv
- R. Nogueira, W. Yang, J. Lin, and K. Cho. Document Expansion by Query Prediction. arXiv:1904.08375, 2019. · arXiv
- L. Gao, X. Ma, J. Lin, and J. Callan. Precise Zero-Shot Dense Retrieval without Relevance Labels. In ACL, 2023.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sangaraju, V., & Vissa, S. (2026) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2026.3730363 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Taheri, H.
- Corresponding author
- Taheri, Hamed
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2603.17787
- OpenAlex
- W7138904184
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Database Systems and Queries
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Keywords
- multi-agent workflows, shared memory, memory governance, enterprise AI, retrieval effectiveness
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
