To sustain coherent long-term interactions, Large Language Model (LLM) agents must navigate the tension between acquiring new information and retaining prior knowledge. Current unified stream-based memory systems facilitate context updates but remain vulnerable to interference from transient noise. Conversely, discrete structured memory architectures provide robust knowledge retention but often struggle to adapt to evolving narratives. To address this, we propose GAM, a hierarchical Graph-based Agentic Memory framework that explicitly decouples memory encoding from consolidation to effectively resolve the conflict between rapid context perception and stable knowledge retention. By isolating ongoing dialogue in an event progression graph and integrating it into a topic associative network only upon semantic shifts, our approach minimizes interference while preserving long-term consistency. Additionally, we introduce a graph-guided, multi-factor retrieval strategy to enhance context precision. Experiments on LoCoMo and LongDialQA indicate that our method consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in both reasoning accuracy and efficiency.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Comparison between Unified Stream-based Memory Systems (upper) and GAM (lower). Unified architectures suffer from Memory Loss and Semantic Drift under direct updates, while GAM uses state switching to reduce both.
Figure 2: Architecture of GAM. The leftmost module switches between buffering and consolidation based on topic boundaries. The central Hierarchical Graph Memory decouples storage into a global Topic Associative Network and local Event Progression Graphs. The rightmost Graph-Guided Retrieval performs top-down traversal with multi-factor ranking.
Model
Method
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Avg
F1
BLEU-1
F1
BLEU-1
F1
BLEU-1
F1
BLEU-1
F1
BLEU-1
Llama 3.2-3B
ReadAgent
2.05
1.96
4.33
4.33
7.53
6.39
3.52
2.75
4.36
3.86
Memorybank
7.35
5.34
3.90
3.41
4.91
5.42
8.76
7.04
6.23
5.30
Memgpt
7.59
5.09
3.25
3.15
5.74
5.55
7.91
6.64
6.12
5.11
A-Mem
17.44
11.74
26.38
19.50
12.53
11.83
28.14
23.87
21.12
16.73
MemoryOS
21.03
13.75
19.38
13.73
11.46
8.58
28.25
20.03
20.03
14.02
Table 1: Performance comparison on the LoCoMo dataset. We report F1 and BLEU-1 scores across different LLM backbones. The best results are highlighted in bold and the second best are underlined.
Model
Method
Avg
F1
BLEU-1
Llama 3.2-3B
ReadAgent
3.97
4.04
Memorybank
3.93
3.60
Memgpt
3.90
3.36
A-Mem
4.11
3.27
MemoryOS
5.85
4.46
Table 2: Performance comparison on the LongDialQA dataset. We report average F1 and BLEU-1 scores. The best results are highlighted in bold and the second best are underlined.
Method
Avg
F1
B-1
w/o TAN
35.07
29.00
w/o MFR
35.94
29.28
w/o SSM
32.58
26.13
w/o EPG
25.06
20.76
Ours
40.00
32.99
Table 3: Ablation study on the LoCoMo dataset. We report average F1 and BLEU-1 scores for different variants.
Method
Tokens/Q
Time (s)
F1
A-Mem
4221.12
2.21
24.20
MemoryOS
3400.41
154.22
28.86
Mem0
1533.94
0.51
35.38
Ours
1370.18
0.80
40.00
Table 4: Efficiency comparison on the LoCoMo dataset. We report token consumption, latency, and F1 score.
Figure 3: Impact of Partitioning Strategies on LoCoMo. Our semantic-boundary approach outperforms heuristic baselines across metrics.
Appendix figures & tables12 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Model
Method
Big Bang Theory
Friends
The Office
Avg
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
Llama 3.2-3B
ReadAgent
5.19
4.70
3.49
4.24
3.24
3.18
3.97
4.04
Memorybank
4.77
4.46
4.14
3.77
2.87
2.56
3.93
3.60
Memgpt
3.94
2.97
3.99
3.85
3.77
3.25
3.90
3.36
A-Mem
5.69
4.20
3.79
3.32
2.86
2.29
4.11
3.27
MemoryOS
8.65
6.46
2.98
3.56
5.92
3.35
5.85
4.46
Appendix
Table 5: Detailed performance comparison on the LongDialQA dataset, including the newly added Mem0 baseline. We report F1 and BLEU-1 scores on three sub-datasets (Big Bang Theory, Friends, The Office) and their average. The best results for each backbone are highlighted in bold, and the second best are underlined.
Method
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Avg
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
w/o TAN
31.80
21.29
39.74
34.15
16.28
13.42
52.46
47.12
35.07
29.00
w/o MFR
33.73
22.91
46.12
38.06
16.30
14.20
47.61
41.96
35.94
29.28
w/o SSM
30.32
19.96
39.53
32.55
16.73
14.08
43.72
37.93
32.58
26.13
w/o EPG
25.35
18.94
33.61
27.70
14.59
13.44
26.68
22.97
25.06
20.76
Ours
35.32
25.77
48.97
39.68
21.14
17.89
54.58
48.62
40.00
32.99
Appendix
Table 6: Detailed ablation study results across different task categories on the LoCoMo dataset.
Model
Method
Multi-Hop
Temporal
Open-Domain
Single-Hop
Avg
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
F1
B-1
Llama 3.2-3B
AriGraph
13.99
7.83
3.72
2.69
20.10
17.74
14.63
11.67
12.58
9.47
Ours
28.74
22.35
46.12
37.24
21.18
18.33
49.02
42.18
36.27
30.02
Qwen 2.5-7B
AriGraph
21.32
12.30
5.51
5.25
15.10
12.40
24.44
19.49
19.34
14.77
Ours
35.32
25.77
48.97
39.68
21.14
17.89
54.58
48.62
40.00
32.99
Qwen 2.5-14B
AriGraph
29.40
18.20
6.00
5.01
16.87
13.65
30.68
24.38
24.44
18.54
Appendix
Table 7: Performance comparison with AriGraph on the LoCoMo benchmark. We report F1 and BLEU-1 for each reasoning category and their average.
Method
Accuracy
F1
B-1
Baseline (Direct Input)
47.35
42.35
45.31
Ours (GAM)
55.51
48.95
51.63
Improvement
+8.16
+6.60
+6.32
Appendix
Table 8: Proxy multimodal evaluation on MovieChat-1K using dense video captions as the input stream.
Metric
Value
Avg. Sessions per Sample
27.2
Avg. Latency per Session
0.63 s
Avg. Input Tokens per Session
932.36
Avg. Output Tokens per Session
6.15
Appendix
Table 9: Cost analysis of the semantic divergence detection mechanism on LoCoMo.
Sessions
Event Nodes
Topic Nodes
Edges
Avg. Tokens
Avg. Latency (s)
Avg. F1
3
81
8
371
1604
3.49
0.65
15
363
43
1791
1864
4.16
0.57
27
657
84
3307
1836
4.71
0.48
Appendix
Table 10: Complexity evolution of the dual-layer graph memory under progressive session injection.
Figure 4: Robustness analysis of the proposed framework under varying topic segmentation noise levels η . The solid red line represents the Average F1 score, which remains remarkably stable around 40.0, significantly outperforming the Fixed Window (Gray Dotted Line) and Session-based (Black Dash-Dotted Line) baselines even at η=0.4 . Dashed lines indicate performance on specific task categories, highlighting the resilience of the hierarchical graph architecture against boundary errors.
Figure 5: Parameter sensitivity analysis on the LoCoMo dataset using the Qwen 2.5-7B backbone. The three subplots illustrate the impact of varying the (a) Role Factor βrole , (b) Temporal Factor βtime , and (c) Confidence Factor βconf on retrieval performance across different task categories. The solid red line represents the Average F1 Score. The relatively flat curves indicate the system’s robustness to hyperparameter variations.
Figure 6: Impact of retrieval size k on model performance across different task categories. We select k=10 as the optimal setting to balance reasoning accuracy with computational efficiency.
The rapid evolution of Large Language Model (LLM) agents has necessitated robust memory systems to support cohesive long-term interaction and complex reasoning. Benefiting from the strong capabilities of LLMs, recent research focus has shifted from simple context extension to the development of dedicated agentic memory systems. However, existing approaches typically rely on rigid retrieval granularity, accumulation-heavy maintenance strategies, and coarse-grained update mechanisms. These design choices create a persistent mismatch between stored information and task-specific reasoning demands, while leading to the unchecked accumulation of logical inconsistencies over time. To address these challenges, we propose Adaptive Memory via Multi-Agent Collaboration (AMA), a novel framework that leverages coordinated agents to manage memory across multiple granularities. AMA employs a hierarchical memory design that dynamically aligns retrieval granularity with task complexity. Specifically, the Constructor and Retriever jointly enable multi-granularity memory construction and adaptive query routing. The Judge verifies the relevance and consistency of retrieved content, triggering iterative retrieval when evidence is insufficient or invoking the Refresher upon detecting logical conflicts. The Refresher then enforces memory consistency by performing targeted updates or removing outdated entries. Extensive experiments on challenging long-context benchmarks show that AMA significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines while reducing token consumption by approximately 80% compared to full-context methods, demonstrating its effectiveness in maintaining retrieval precision and long-term memory consistency.
Weiquan Huang, Zixuan Wang, Hehai Lin +6
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (Guangzhou) · Shandong University · Nanyang Technological University +1
Long-term memory is essential for LLM-based agents operating over extended interactions. Existing memory systems primarily update memory when new information arrives, treating retrieval as the endpoint of memory access rather than a driver of memory evolution. Consequently, retrieval feedback is rarely exploited to reorganize memory for future access continuously. Moreover, most existing approaches rely on predefined memory structures together with fixed retrieval pipelines, limiting the agent's ability to organize and evolve its own memory autonomously. Inspired by memory reconsolidation in cognitive neuroscience, we propose REALM, a reconsolidation-evolution agentic long-term memory framework. It models long-term memory as a continual lifecycle by autonomously organizing memories into a heterogeneous cognitive graph, retrieving evidence via adaptively composed graph-search atoms, and continually reconsolidating memories based on retrieval feedback. REALM achieves an average accuracy of 75.97% on LoCoMo and 65.11% on LongMemEval, outperforming the strongest baselines by 7.17 and 1.31 points respectively. Ablation studies confirm that memory reconsolidation consistently boosts performance, with further analyses revealing that it progressively reorganizes related memory units into more coherent local structures for collective evidence recall and utilization during reasoning. These results suggest that retrieval-driven memory reconsolidation provides an effective mechanism for continually evolving long-term memory in LLM agents.
Yuanyi Song, Yukai Wang, Xinbei Ma +7
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · OPPO · National University of Singapore
Despite recent progress, LLM agents still struggle with reasoning over long interaction histories. While current memory-augmented agents rely on a static retrieve-then-reason paradigm, this rigid pipeline design prevents them from dynamically adapting memory access to intermediate evidence discovered during inference. To bridge this gap, we propose MRAgent, a framework that combines an associative memory graph with an active reconstruction mechanism. We represent memory as a Cue-Tag-Content graph, where associative tags serve as semantic bridges connecting fine-grained cues to memory contents. Operating on this structure, our active reconstruction mechanism integrates LLM reasoning directly into memory access, allowing the agent to iteratively explore and prune retrieval paths based on accumulated evidence. This ensures that memory retrieval is dynamically adapted to the reasoning context while avoiding combinatorial explosion caused by unconstrained expansion. Experiments on the LoCoMo benchmark and LongMemEval benchmark demonstrate significant improvements over strong baselines (up to 23%), while substantially reducing token and runtime cost, highlighting the effectiveness of active and associative reconstruction for long-horizon memory reasoning.