cs.AIApr 13, 2026

The Missing Knowledge Layer in Cognitive Architectures for AI Agents

Authors: Michaël Roynard

Organizations: Independant Researcher

Abstract

The two most influential cognitive architecture frameworks for AI agents, CoALA [21] and JEPA [12], both lack an explicit Knowledge layer with its own persistence semantics. This gap produces a category error: systems apply cognitive decay to factual claims, or treat facts and experiences with identical update mechanics. We survey persistence semantics across existing memory systems and identify eight convergence points, from Karpathy's LLM Knowledge Base [10] to the BEAM benchmark's near-zero contradiction-resolution scores [22], all pointing to related architectural gaps. We propose a four-layer decom position (Knowledge, Memory, Wisdom, Intelligence) where each layer has fundamentally different persistence semantics: indefinite supersession, Ebbinghaus decay, evidence-gated revision, and ephemeral inference respectively. Companion implementations in Python and Rust demonstrate the architectural separation is feasible. We borrow terminology from cognitive science as a useful analogy (the Knowledge/Memory distinction echoes Tulving's trichotomy), but our layers are engineering constructs justified by persistence-semantics requirements, not by neural architecture. We argue that these distinctions demand distinct persistence semantics in engineering implementations, and that no current framework or system provides this.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Mar 18, 2026

Graph-Native Cognitive Memory for AI Agents: Formal Belief Revision Semantics for Versioned Memory Architectures

While individual components for AI agent memory exist in prior systems, their architectural synthesis and formal grounding remain underexplored. We present Kumiho, a graph-native cognitive memory architecture grounded in formal belief revision semantics. The structural primitives required for cognitive memory -- immutable revisions, mutable tag pointers, typed dependency edges, URI-based addressing -- are identical to those required for managing agent-produced work as versionable assets, enabling a unified graph-native architecture that serves both purposes. The central formal contribution is a correspondence between the AGM belief revision framework and the operational semantics of a property graph memory system, proving satisfaction of the basic AGM postulates (K2--K6) and Hansson's belief base postulates (Relevance, Core-Retainment). The architecture implements a dual-store model (Redis working memory, Neo4j long-term graph) with hybrid fulltext and vector retrieval. On LoCoMo (token-level F1), Kumiho achieves 0.565 overall F1 (n=1,986) including 97.5% adversarial refusal accuracy. On LoCoMo-Plus, a Level-2 cognitive memory benchmark testing implicit constraint recall, Kumiho achieves 93.3% judge accuracy (n=401); independent reproduction by the benchmark authors yielded results in the mid-80% range, still substantially outperforming all published baselines (best: Gemini 2.5 Pro, 45.7%). Three architectural innovations drive the results: prospective indexing (LLM-generated future-scenario implications indexed at write time), event extraction (structured causal events preserved in summaries), and client-side LLM reranking. The architecture is model-decoupled: switching the answer model from GPT-4o-mini (~88%) to GPT-4o (93.3%) improves end-to-end accuracy without pipeline changes, at a total evaluation cost of ~$14 for 401 entries.
Apr 19, 2026

The Continuity Layer: Why Intelligence Needs an Architecture for What It Carries Forward

The most important architectural problem in AI is not the size of the model but the absence of a layer that carries forward what the model has come to understand. Sessions end. Context windows fill. Memory APIs return flat facts that the model has to reinterpret from scratch on every read. The result is intelligence that is powerful per session and amnesiac across time. This position paper argues that the layer which fixes this, the continuity layer, is the most consequential piece of infrastructure the field has not yet built, and that the engineering work to build it has begun in public. The formal evaluation framework for the property described here is the ATANT benchmark (arXiv:2604.06710), published separately with evaluation results on a 250-story corpus; a companion paper (arXiv:2604.10981) positions this framework against existing memory, long-context, and agentic-memory benchmarks. The paper defines continuity as a system property with seven required characteristics, distinct from memory and from retrieval; describes a storage primitive (Decomposed Trace Convergence Memory) whose write-time decomposition and read-time reconstruction produce that property; maps the engineering architecture to the theological pattern of kenosis and the symbolic pattern of Alpha and Omega, and argues this mapping is structural rather than metaphorical; proposes a four-layer development arc from external SDK to hardware node to long-horizon human infrastructure; examines why the physics limits now constraining the model layer make the continuity layer newly consequential; and argues that the governance architecture (privacy implemented as physics rather than policy, founder-controlled class shares on non-negotiable architectural commitments) is inseparable from the product itself.
Oct 6, 2026

Persistent Memory in Multi-Agent LLM Inference: What It Costs, What It Buys, and When You Can Tell

Decomposing long-context inference across cooperating agents bounds the active KV cache per call rather than total evidence, which matters when KV-cache memory binds. Many such systems add a persistent tier storing and recalling reasoning traces, usually validated by an ablation reporting an accuracy gain. We measure both on one three-tier agent architecture. Decomposition delivers: peak KV working set of 14.3 MiB per query against 35.5 and 35.3 MiB for single-pass and retrieval-augmented baselines. The persistent tier does not: across eight controlled dataset pairs at n=100 per arm it costs +0.368 MiB [+0.167, +0.590] of peak cache and produces no detectable accuracy change (+0.015, 95% CI [-0.011, +0.046]). We argue the null is structural: single-question benchmarks supply each item with its own evidence and score it independently, and correctness requires resetting stored traces between conditions, so recall has nothing informative to retrieve. Reaching it took four measurement corrections -- three inflating the apparent benefit, the fourth making an effect that size look resolvable -- none visible in the results table. We give the conditions an agent-memory ablation must satisfy and detection procedures that need no knowledge of the specific defect.