HingeMem: Boundary Guided Long-Term Memory with Query Adaptive Retrieval for Scalable Dialogues
Organizations: College of Design and Innovation, Tongji University, Shanghai, China · Shanghai Research Institute for Intelligent Autonomous Systems, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
Abstract
Long-term memory is critical for dialogue systems that support continuous, sustainable, and personalized interactions. However, existing methods rely on continuous summarization or OpenIE-based graph construction paired with fixed Top-k retrieval, leading to limited adaptability across query categories and high computational overhead. In this paper, we propose HingeMem, a boundary-guided long-term memory that operationalizes event segmentation theory to build an interpretable indexing interface via boundary-triggered hyperedges over four elements: person, time, location, and topic. When any such element changes, HingeMem draws a boundary and writes the current segment, thereby reducing redundant operations and preserving salient context. To enable robust and efficient retrieval under diverse information needs, HingeMem introduces query-adaptive retrieval mechanisms that jointly decide (a) what to retrieve: determine the query-conditioned routing over the element-indexed memory; (b) how much to retrieve: control the retrieval depth based on the estimated query type. Extensive experiments across LLM scales (from 0.6B to production-tier models; e.g., Qwen3-0.6B to Qwen-Flash) on LOCOMO show that HingeMem achieves approximately relative improvement over strong baselines without query categories specification, while reducing computational cost (68% question answering token cost compared to HippoRAG2). Beyond advancing memory modeling, HingeMem's adaptive retrieval makes it a strong fit for web applications requiring efficient and trustworthy memory over extended interactions.
Figures & tables
| Single-Hop | Multi-Hop | Temporal | Open-Domain | Adversarial | Overall | |||||||||||||||
| Method | Cat. | |||||||||||||||||||
| LOCOMO | ✓ | 12.7 | 16.5 | 19.7 | 20.9 | 10.4 | 11.5 | 20.1 | 30.2 | 66.8 | 90.1 | 25.8 | 33.5 | 0.132 | ||||||
| RAG (Top-5) | ✓ | 32.4 | 47.4 | 26.9 | 38.6 | 22.5 | 18.0 | 21.4 | 35.4 | 90.6 | 90.3 | 42.6 | 50.5 | 0.293 | ||||||
| RAG (Top-10) | ✓ | 36.4 | 50.7 | 29.6 | 38.6 | 27.7 | 22.7 | 21.2 | 37.5 | 86.8 | 86.5 | 44.6 | 51.9 | 0.306 | ||||||
| RAG (Top-20) | ✓ | 37.7 | 52.5 | 34.9 | 48.9 | 30.0 | 22.7 | 21.9 | 41.6 | 83.2 | 82.9 | 45.5 | 53.5 | 0.315 | ||||||
| ReadAgent † | ✓ | 6.6 | - | 2.5 | - | 5.3 | - | 10.1 | - | 5.4 | - | 5.7 | - | 0.109 | ||||||
| Conversation Statistics | Counts | Question Statistics | Counts |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Conversations | 10 | Single-hop Questions | 841 |
| Avg. Sessions in a conversation | 27.2 | Multi-hop Questions | 282 |
| Avg. Turns in a conversation | 294.1 | Temporal Questions | 321 |
| Avg. Tokens in a conversation | 15965.8 | Open-domain Questions | 96 |
| Avg. Tokens in a session | 587.0 | Adversarial Questions | 446 |
| Avg. Tokens in a Turn | 27.1 | Total | 1986 |
| # Num | Method | All | Each Category | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ① | RAG+TM | 44.6 | 36.4 | 29.6 | 27.7 | 21.2 | 86.8 |
| ② | RAG+BM | 57.4 | 54.5 | 39.3 | 50.1 | 24.3 | 86.8 |
| ③ | RAG+BM+NI | 58.1 | 56.1 | 43.6 | 51.2 | 27.7 | 82.7 |
| ④ | ③+HR | 61.2 | 59.5 | 47.4 | 52.9 | 28.2 | 86.1 |
| ⑤ | ③+HR+AS | 63.9 | 61.1 | 53.6 | 57.4 | 30.7 | 87.4 |
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Memory Statistics | Counts |
|---|---|
| Avg. Persons in a conversation | 12.8 |
| Avg. Times in a conversation | 59.6 |
| Avg. Locations in a conversation | 34.6 |
| Avg. Topics in a conversation | 81.5 |
| Avg. Hyperedges in a conversation | 103.2 |
Long-Term Conversational Memory
Long-term conversational memory helps AI assistants retain, update, and use information from past conversations across sessions.
See all 267 papers