cs.CLJun 24, 2026

Reclaim Evaluation: A Lossy Memory Is Worse Than an Empty One

Authors: Alex Kwon

Organizations: Independent Researcher

Abstract

A language model's memory can be worse than no memory at all. Give a model a memory that kept a wrong conclusion but dropped the work behind it, and it re-emits the stale value as a confident answer; give the same model an empty memory, and it abstains. We call this failure brittle memory. The information loss behind it is definitional (an answer cannot be recomputed once its inputs are gone), so the loss is only the setup; the finding is behavioral. Whether a model turns the lost source into a confident error or an abstention is set by disposition, not capability: four of eight models we test emit, and the four that abstain escape only by an interface affordance -- forced through a mandatory structured-output field, as production tool calls are, they commit the inherited wrong value. We measure correctability with reclaim evaluation: induce a known drift, compress the interaction at a fixed budget, deliver a correction that names the error, and score exact recovery of the known answer, judge-free. Correctability is bottlenecked not by capability but by whether the memory kept a re-derivation basis (the source) rather than the answer, so an 8B model and a frontier one wall in the same place. A one-line source-first policy -- keep the recomputable source, drop the re-derivable conclusion -- restores correctability at equal budget wherever the source is compact and identifiable, with a length-matched control that rules out 'more text' and a deployable one-prompt form weaker than the oracle. We map where the fix fails (source size, noise, a silent truncation mode a completeness tag makes loud), show the failure compounds through memory loops, and replicate on three deployed memory systems and on real dialogue (MultiWOZ, where the checkable value is present by construction). We release the harness, the paired memory conditions, and validators built to come out false.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jul 30, 2026cs.LG

Subtract, Transport, or Replay? Auditable Deletion from Language-Model Memory

Exact deletion from persistent language-model memory depends on whether a record's effect remains addressable after later computation. Native Kimi Delta Attention (KDA) gives a negative result for the tested receipt interface: the corpus-pooled raw recurrent contribution changes by 12-49% with the suffix and remains 8-49% after a decay-ledger correction. Native omission also changes later transition and write terms and other active caches. Frozen-input transport succeeds on its fixed-input control; the changed terms place native omission outside the tested receipt classes. Checkpoint replay supplies the evaluated recomputation path; zero residual on final logits and all 80 audited KDA arrays verifies restoration across the declared checkpoint surface. The complementary result is constructive. We retrofit support-vector memory into frozen Gemma 3 without attention transfer, low-rank recovery, distillation, adapters, or language-model parameter updates. Prefix-mass preservation and one box per prefix solve give base-matched admission at 4B with 1.85% perplexity overhead. At 1B and 4B, verified deletion agrees with its conditional retained-key refit within 1.3e-10 maximum next-token KL; behavioral attacks at 4B reach never-stored or chance baselines. Across 1B, 4B, and 12B, the 4B checkpoint uniquely combines base-matched admission with low overhead. The paper's two contributions are a negative result for native KDA's tested receipt classes and a positive training-free construction for addressable pretrained memory.
Vishwajith Ramesh
Large Language Model MemoryConversational MemoryConcept Erasure
AskPDF
May 26, 2026cs.AI

MemFail: Stress-Testing Failure Modes of LLM Memory Systems

Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on external memory systems to remain consistent across long-horizon interactions, but little empirical work has been done to understand the specific failure modes and design choices that these systems present. Existing benchmarks report aggregate question-answering accuracy and treat memory systems as black boxes, making it impossible to attribute an incorrect answer to a particular failure mode of the system. We introduce MemFail, a diagnostic benchmark that isolates the failure modes of modern LLM memory systems. We begin by formalizing memory systems as the composition of three canonical operations -- summarization, storage, and retrieval -- and identify the potential failure modes induced by each. Based on these hypothesized failure modes, we construct five datasets spanning four tasks, each adversarially designed to test a specific operation of a memory system. Using these datasets, we evaluate four state-of-the-art memory systems on MemFail and demonstrate how MemFail can be used to empirically understand the tradeoffs induced by differences in memory system architectures.
Ishir Garg, Neel Kolhe, Dawn Song +1
Large Language Model MemoryFailure ModesDiagnostic Benchmark
AskPDF
Aug 31, 2026cs.CL

What It Costs to Compose, Rebuild, and Correct Precomputed Memory

Language models can answer from precomputed memory, a model's saved reading of a body of material, reused across requests instead of read again at each. This paper maps where that practice preserves correctness and the conditions under which it fails. Across experiments on Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct using both saved key-value caches and trained compressions of them, precomputed memory degrades when assembled from separately prepared parts, stays current only through rebuilds costing a large fraction of full preparation in our measurements, and ignores corrections served beside it conditional on phrasing. If precomputed memories can be served alongside one another, be cost-efficiently rebuilt, and be superseded by new information arriving in real-time, they can serve as a way to avoid re-feeding context to a model over repeated queries. The implication of our results for a deployed system that deals with a variety of queries is that precomputed memories are best rebuilt on the cadence at which new information changes what the memory was originally computed from. Both warm-rebuilding trained compressions of key-value caches and serving specifically-phrased updates beside a memory, as pasted text or injected cache state, show particular promise for keeping precomputed memories current, the latter as an interim measure between rebuilds, and we measure the cost and name the remaining questions associated with each.
Asa Shepard
Large Language Model MemoryPrefillRetrieval BenchmarksKey-Value CacheUpdates
AskPDF