cs.IRFeb 27, 2026

LLMs Remember First, Forget Last: Dual-Process Interference in Large Language Models

Authors: Sourav Chattaraj, Kanak Raj

Organizations: Thomson Reuters, Bengaluru, India

Abstract

Large language models can process millions of tokens, yet how they handle conflicting information within context remains poorly understood. From patient health logs tracking evolving vital signs to legal documents with superseding clauses, real-world applications routinely require models to retrieve specific values from streams of semantically similar, competing updates. We adapt classical interference paradigms from cognitive psychology to compare retroactive interference (RI; recalling initial values after updates) and proactive interference (PI; recalling recent values despite competing prior encodings) across 39 LLMs spanning 1B to 2.5T parameters. Every model exhibits the same pattern: PI causes substantially greater degradation than RI (d = 1.73), the opposite of the typical human finding where new information more readily disrupts old. Four lines of evidence indicate that RI and PI engage distinct mechanisms: model size predicts RI resistance but not PI; the two scores correlate only weakly; error analysis reveals qualitatively different failure profiles, with RI failures reflecting passive retrieval failure and PI failures reflecting active primacy intrusion; and hallucination rates remain below 1% in both conditions. An adaptive bootstrap design further shows that RI decays smoothly while PI collapses bimodally at high interference, consistent with gradual dilution versus winner-take-all attention dynamics. These findings characterize a systematic primacy bias in transformer attention, with implications for reliable deployment in settings where in-context information evolves over time.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables2 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Apr 1, 2026

In-context superposition: human-like working memory interference in large language models

Intelligent systems must maintain and manipulate task-relevant information online to adapt to dynamic environments. This capacity, known as working memory, is fundamental to human reasoning. Yet, human working memory is strikingly limited, maintaining only three to four items in a brain with billions of neurons. Surprisingly, large language models (LLMs), despite different substrates and direct access to prior context through attention, exhibit similar working memory limitations. Why should such different systems face analogous constraints? We propose that working memory limitations reflect a general trade-off of shared representations: representational compression and reuse support efficient learning and generalization, but also cause simultaneously active representations to interfere. We show a two-layer transformer trained on a working memory task can solve it perfectly, but diverse trained LLMs exhibit human-like limitations: performance declines with memory load, while retrieval is biased by recency and stimulus statistics. Mirroring humans, working memory performance in LLMs is also associated with broader model capability. Mechanistically, we show that LLMs encode multiple memories in entangled representations --- a condition we call in-context superposition --- and progressively suppress competing content while aligning the target with the readout. Moreover, a causal intervention that suppresses interfering information improves performance. Together, these findings suggest that working memory capacity reflects the ability to select task-relevant information under interference, a computational challenge shared by biological and artificial systems.
Oct 15, 2026

Language Models Share a Readout Bottleneck in Working Memory

Large language models (LLMs) reproduce a human working-memory signature on the N-back task: performance declines as memory load N increases, and errors concentrate on lures, items that repeat the current stimulus at a neighboring but incorrect serial position. We ask whether this shared behavioral signature reflects a shared mechanism. The literature offers two candidate accounts. On a precision account, softmax attention cannot concentrate its weight on the item N positions back, so adjacent items are retrieved instead. On an interference account, attention selects the correct item, but the content of competing items corrupts the decision. We dissociate these accounts in 15 pretrained LLMs from three families (70 million to 14 billion parameters) and in minimal transformers trained from scratch. In all three families, the attention heads that carry the task attend to the target on most missed matches. Linear probes decode near-perfectly whether a matching letter occurred at the target or at a lure position, even on trials where the model false-alarms to the lure, although its own decisions barely distinguish the two. Sharpening attention yields negligible gains, whereas suppressing the letter identity of non-target items improves sensitivity (d') in nearly all model-by-load conditions. In larger models the task is spread over more heads, and removing interference helps more. In minimal transformers, precision limits a single attention layer, but a second layer removes this constraint. The working-memory limit of LLMs therefore lies in reading items out under interference rather than in locating them, consistent with interference accounts of human working memory.
Mar 15, 2026

Learning to Forget: Sleep-Inspired Memory Consolidation for Resolving Proactive Interference in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) suffer from proactive interference (PI): outdated information in the context window disrupts retrieval of current values. This interference degrades retrieval accuracy log-linearly as stale associations accumulate, a bottleneck that persists regardless of context length and resists prompt-engineering mitigations. Biological brains resolve an analogous challenge through sleep-dependent memory consolidation: synaptic downscaling, selective replay, and targeted forgetting. We propose SleepGate, a biologically inspired framework that augments transformer-based LLMs with a learned sleep cycle over the key-value (KV) cache. SleepGate introduces three mechanisms: (1) a conflict-aware temporal tagger detecting when new entries supersede old ones; (2) a lightweight forgetting gate trained to selectively evict or compress stale cache entries; and (3) a consolidation module that merges surviving entries into compact summaries. These components activate periodically during inference in sleep micro-cycles, governed by an adaptive entropy-based trigger. We formalize a dual-phase training objective jointly optimizing language modeling during the wake phase and post-consolidation retrieval during the sleep phase. Theoretical analysis shows SleepGate reduces the interference horizon from O(n) to O(log n). In experiments with a small-scale transformer (4 layers, 793K parameters), SleepGate achieves 99.5% retrieval accuracy at PI depth 5 and 97.0% at depth 10, while all five baselines -- full KV cache, sliding window, H2O, StreamingLLM, and decay-only ablation -- remain below 18%. Our framework offers an architecture-level solution that prompt engineering cannot address.