Averaged over five seeds, MemGuard achieves the best success metric and lowest average steps in all 16 backbone-benchmark settings, improving over ReasoningBank, the strongest prior baseline among the memory methods the authors evaluate.
Abstract
LLM agents are moving from single-prompt use to long task streams in which reusable memory becomes a core capability for terminal, software-engineering, and web tasks. Such memory is useful only when stored experience remains reliable across hundreds of interactions, but two failure modes break that assumption in practice. The first is unreliable admission: failed trajectories,accidental successes, and misleading observations enter memory because they appear relevant, then mislead later decisions. The second is memory drift: long-running banks accumulate duplicate, stale, and conflicting records that retrieval alone cannot repair. MemGuard's key distinction is to treat verifier output not as a one-shot filter, but as persistent lifecycle metadata. It converts multi-criteria score-token verification into reward, confidence, label, and uncertainty descriptors that are attached to every candidate before activation and reused during retrieval, conflict resolution, summarization, and archival. We evaluate MemGuard on Terminal-Bench 2.0, SWE-Bench Verified, WebArena, and Mind2Web across four backbones, comparing against four memory baselines plus a verifier-only control under matched runtime budgets. Averaged over five seeds, MemGuard achieves the best success metric and lowest average steps in all 16 backbone-benchmark settings, improving over ReasoningBank, the strongest prior baseline among the memory methods we evaluate, with a largest gain of 7.9 success-rate points on WebArena, 5.6 step-success-rate points on Mind2Web, and 2.4-3.5 points on terminal and software-engineering benchmarks. Code is available at https://github.com/whyyyyy123/MemGuard.
The introduction of TEPA, a revocable evidence-memory mechanism that makes validity an explicit state of memory, and the results establish lifecycle revocation as a core memory operation for agents that must falsify, audit, and later re-promote evolving knowledge.
Yan Zhou, Yue Ouyang, Kaiyang Zheng et al.· 3 citations· ⚡1
This work evaluates five LLMs as memory writers and two as executors across procurement, cybersecurity, and finance and introduces EAL-Bench, which measures how accurately persistent memory preserves evolving authorization state and whether errors propagate to downstream unauthorized actions.
Tommaso Cerruti, Mika Okamoto, Ansel Kaplan Erol· 8 citations· ⚡1
Hindsight Memory-PRM exploits this audit trail twice: offline to train an operation-conditioned memory-utility critic, and online, where retrievals, citations, and one controlled deletion-and-reanswer per probe settle an intervention-calibrated entry-level presence credit.
H. Jia, Yang Liu, Ying-Guang Yang et al.· 0 citations
This work evaluates a frozen, closed-set, action-scored benchmark with 2 suites that represent 2 different meanings of "no memory", finding that at the 3 smaller scales, models trust a stale document more than a stale memory; at 8B, the difference is not significant.
TRACE is presented, a training-free layer that treats re-entry as an eligibility decision rather than a storage or retrieval operation, reconciling a departure checkpoint against absence-period updates, resolving explicit and implicit invalidation, and releasing a bounded Return View only when it covers the returning r...
Wen-Jun Xiong, Shengtao Zhang, Shangding Gu et al.· 0 citations
GPM is introduced, an auditable bitemporal state-transition model with source-bound admission, derived lifecycle state, current public barriers, and fail-closed structured release with bounded contract and implementation results, not open-world model accuracy or evidence of world truth.
Guodong Xu· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.