AI Memory, specifically how models organizes and retrieves historical messages, becomes increasingly valuable to Large Language Models (LLMs), yet existing methods (RAG and Graph-RAG) primarily retrieve memory through similarity-based mechanisms. While efficient, such System-1-style retrieval struggles with scenarios that require global reasoning or comprehensive coverage of all relevant information. In this work, We propose Mnemis, a novel memory framework that integrates System-1 similarity search with a complementary System-2 mechanism, termed Global Selection. Mnemis organizes memory into a base graph for similarity retrieval and a hierarchical graph that enables top-down, deliberate traversal over semantic hierarchies. By combining the complementary strength from both retrieval routes, Mnemis retrieves memory items that are both semantically and structurally relevant. Mnemis achieves state-of-the-art performance across all compared methods on long-term memory benchmarks, scoring 93.9 on LoCoMo and 91.6 on LongMemEval-S using GPT-4.1-mini.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Framework of Mnemis together with the workflow of base graph ingestion, hierarchical graph ingestion and search. Left is a real case from LoCoMo.
Figure 2: Mnemis Hierarchical Graph Overview.
LLM
Methods
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Overall
♯ Questions
282
321
96
841
1540
GPT-4o-mini
Full Context
66.8
56.2
48.6
83.0
72.3
RAG
59.9
62.9
63.5
73.5
68.2
LangMem
52.4
24.9
47.6
61.4
51.3
MemOS
64.3
73.2
55.2
78.4
73.3
Mem0
60.3
50.4
40.6
68.1
61.3
Table 1: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LoCoMo by question type. Following the common practice, Category 5 (Adversarial) is excluded from the results.
LLM
Methods
SSU
MS
SSP
TR
KU
SSA
Overall
♯ Questions
70
133
30
133
78
56
500
GPT-4o-mini
Full Context
78.6
38.3
6.7
42.1
78.2
89.3
55.0
RAG
88.6
47.4
70.0
63.2
70.5
91.1
67.2
Mem0
91.4
66.2
34.0
63.9
74.4
96.4
71.1
Zep
92.9
47.4
53.3
54.1
74.4
75.0
63.2
Nemori
88.6
51.1
46.7
61.7
61.5
83.9
64.2
Table 2: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LongMemEval-S, categorized by question type: single-session-user (SSU), multi-session (MS), single-session-preference (SSP), temporal reasoning (TR), knowledge update (KU), and single-session-assistant (SSA).
Stage
♯ Prompt Tokens
♯ Completion Tokens
E2E Runtime(s)
Base Graph Ingestion
3.87×107
1.06×106
1111.40
Hierarchical Graph Ingestion
1.39×107
9.27×105
3873.26
Global Selection
1.37×106
1.21×105
3637.65
Table 3: Detailed LLM cost of Mnemis on LoCoMo using GPT-4.1-mini, reported as the overall number of prompt tokens, completion tokens, and end-to-end runtime for processing the entire dataset. Runtime depends heavily on database latency and parallelism configuration; the reported values are for reference only, and we will continue to optimize it for greater efficiency.
Settings
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Overall
System-1 RAG
64.9
76.6
67.7
76.5
73.8
System-1 Graph
84.8
62.6
74.0
88.6
81.6
System-1 RAG + Graph
85.1
84.7
75.0
93.7
89.1
System-1 Re-ranked
88.7
85.0
75.0
92.4
89.1
System-2 Only
88.1
78.5
79.5
92.0
87.7
System-1 + System-2
91.8
90.3
82.3
96.2
93.3
Table 4: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LoCoMo by question type.
Figure 3: Mnemis win case on LoCoMo benchmark. While similarity search fixates on the surface-level cause gastritis, Mnemissuccessfully identifies the underlying root cause, namely that Sam is overweight. This condition leads to the gastritis and motivates him to change his lifestyle.
Figure 4: LoCoMo result across different top- k settings.
Re-ranker
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Overall
Qwen3-Reranker-0.6B
91.8
90.3
79.2
95.2
92.6
BGE-Reranker-V2-M3
90.1
90.0
77.1
96.4
92.7
Qwen3-Reranker-8B
91.8
90.3
82.3
96.2
93.3
Table 5: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LoCoMo by question type.
Embedder
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Overall
MiniLM
46.1
57.9
64.6
62.5
58.7
BGE-M3
50.0
74.1
63.5
74.0
69.0
Qwen3-Embedding-0.6B
64.9
76.6
67.7
76.5
73.8
Gemma-300M
62.4
78.8
60.4
82.9
76.9
Table 6: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LoCoMo by question type.
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: Mnemis win case on LongMemEval-S benchmark, where Mnemis successfully retrieve "Company’s Annual Charity Soccer Tournament" from "Sports Events".
User IDs
0
1
2
3
4
LLM-as-a-Judge True Question IDs
31, 8, 74
13, 74, 11
7, 26, 60
6, 160, 59
124, 161, 80
LLM-as-a-Judge False Question IDs
7, 138, 137
73, 47, 20
17, 49, 63
195, 92, 53
165, 166, 6
User IDs
5
6
7
8
9
LLM-as-a-Judge True Question IDs
104, 110, 23
47, 65, 96
25, 97, 94
126, 147, 32
99, 156, 54
LLM-as-a-Judge False Question IDs
55, 19, 119
1, 62, 31
117, 77, 23
102, 39, 70
7, 1, 61
Appendix
Table 7: Sampled Question ID for Human Evaluation in LoCoMo.
Methods
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Overall
♯ Questions
282
321
96
841
1540
Full Context
77.2
74.2
56.6
86.9
80.6
RAG
64.9
76.6
67.7
76.5
73.8
LangMem
71.0
50.8
59.0
84.5
73.4
Mem0
68.2
56.9
47.9
71.4
66.3
Zep
53.7
60.2
43.8
66.9
61.6
Appendix
Table 8: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LoCoMo by question type. Following the common practice, Category 5 (Adversarial) is excluded from the results.
Methods
SSU
MS
SSP
TR
KU
SSA
Overall
♯ Questions
70
133
30
133
78
56
500
Full Context
85.7
51.1
16.7
60.2
76.9
98.2
65.6
RAG
82.9
54.9
86.7
67.7
80.8
94.6
72.6
PREMem
92.9
57.1
36.7
59.4
84.6
12.5
60.8
Mem0
94.3
66.9
86.7
75.9
87.2
96.4
80.8
Nemori
90.0
55.6
86.7
72.2
79.5
92.9
74.6
Appendix
Table 9: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LongMemEval-S, categorized by question type: single-session-user (SSU), multi-session (MS), single-session-preference (SSP), temporal reasoning (TR), knowledge update (KU), and single-session-assistant (SSA).
Settings
top- k
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Overall
System-1 RAG
5
49.6
70.1
65.6
66.8
64.3
10
64.9
76.6
67.7
76.5
73.8
30
77.3
82.9
69.8
86.0
82.7
50
81.6
84.1
71.9
89.1
85.6
System-1 Graph
5
79.4
61.4
75.0
86.7
79.4
10
84.8
62.6
74.0
88.6
81.6
Appendix
Table 10: Detailed performance (LLM-as-a-Judge score) on LoCoMo by question type.
Large language model assistants are increasingly expected to retain and reason over information accumulated across many sessions. We introduce EngramaBench, a benchmark for long-term conversational memory built around five personas, one hundred multi-session conversations, and one hundred fifty queries spanning factual recall, cross-space integration, temporal reasoning, adversarial abstention, and emergent synthesis. We evaluate Engrama, a graph-structured memory system, against GPT-4o full-context prompting and Mem0, an open-source vector-retrieval memory system. All three use the same answering model (GPT-4o), isolating the effect of memory architecture. GPT-4o full-context achieves the highest composite score (0.6186), while Engrama scores 0.5367 globally but is the only system to score higher than full-context prompting on cross-space reasoning (0.6532 vs. 0.6291, n=30). Mem0 is cheapest but substantially weaker (0.4809). Ablations reveal that the components driving Engrama's cross-space advantage trade off against global composite score, exposing a systems-level tension between structured memory specialization and aggregate optimization.
Large Language Models (LLMs) lack persistent memory for long-term personalized conversations. Existing graph-based memory systems suffer from information dilution, absent provenance tracking, and uniform retrieval that ignores query context. We introduce MemORAI (Memory Organization and Retrieval via Adaptive Graph Intelligence), a framework that integrates three innovations: selective memory filtering with dual-layer compression to retain user-persona-relevant content, a provenance-enriched multi-relational graph tracking factual origins at the turn level, and query-adaptive subgraph retrieval with Dynamic Weighted PageRank that applies query-conditioned edge weighting. Evaluated on LOCOMO and LongMemEval benchmarks, MemORAI achieves state-of-the-art performance in memory retrieval and personalized response generation, demonstrating that selective storage, enriched representation, and adaptive retrieval are essential for coherent, personalized LLM agents.
Long-term conversational large language model (LLM) agents require memory systems that can recover relevant evidence from historical interactions without overwhelming the answer stage with irrelevant context. However, existing memory systems, including hierarchical ones, still often rely solely on vector similarity for retrieval. It tends to produce bloated evidence sets: adding many superficially similar dialogue turns yields little additional recall, but lowers retrieval precision, increases answer-stage context cost, and makes retrieved memories harder to inspect and manage. To address this, we propose HiGMem (Hierarchical and LLM-Guided Memory System), a two-level event-turn memory system that allows LLMs to use event summaries as semantic anchors to predict which related turns are worth reading. This allows the model to inspect high-level event summaries first and then focus on a smaller set of potentially useful turns, providing a concise and reliable evidence set through reasoning, while avoiding the retrieval overhead that would be excessively high compared to vector retrieval. On the LoCoMo10 benchmark, HiGMem achieves the best F1 on four of five question categories and improves adversarial F1 from 0.54 to 0.78 over A-Mem, while retrieving an order of magnitude fewer turns. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/ZeroLoss-Lab/HiGMem.
Shuqi Cao, Jingyi He, Fei Tan
East China Normal University, Shanghai, China · Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China