Do You Remember? Toward Memory-Centric Multimodal AI

Long-term memory is essential for LVLM agents to maintain consistency and integrate information across extended multimodal interactions. Existing agent memory systems, however, often reduce visual experiences into textual summaries or rely on static retrieve-then-reason pipelines, which are inefficient at query time and brittle when questions require image-text binding, temporal updates, or visual details. We propose Prospective Multimodal Memory Compilation, a framework that shifts part of the memory reasoning process from query time to memory consolidation time. Given accumulated multimodal interactions, a Questioner predicts future question candidates, a Planner compiles question-conditioned multimodal memory programs, and a Doubter verifies whether the planned evidence path can support the predicted answer. The verified question-program pairs form a structured question bank for efficient query-time routing and evidence retrieval. Experiments on multimodal long-term memory benchmarks show that our method improves answer quality and visual evidence recall while reducing query-time token and latency costs. Extensive ablations analyze the effects of self-feedback, dynamic planning, raw-image access, and question bank coverage.

Interaction between users and LLM agents is increasingly multimodal: conversations interleave text with images, and a later question may target either. Yet most agent memories are designed around text, and even the few that support multimodal conversations still fail on vision-related questions. We trace this failure to an assumption behind the similarity search they rely on: in the index space, a query lies close to the relevant evidence that answers it. In multimodal settings, two gaps break it. By the modality gap, a query lies closer to memory content of its own modality than to evidence in another, even in a trained joint embedding space. By the similarity-relevance gap, the content most similar to a query is often not the evidence that answers it, most acutely when a query carries both text and image and its evidence resembles neither part alone. We present V-Mem, a multimodal agentic memory system that routes retrieval by the modality of the query and that of the target evidence, both recognized from the query alone. To cross the modality gap, V-Mem organizes the conversation into rounds and returns the target-modality content from the same round as the match, without comparing across modalities. To close the similarity-relevance gap, it searches with an LLM-generated anchor that sits closer to the relevant evidence than the query does: a hypothetical caption for a text-only query seeking an image, and an enriched search anchor, the query text plus relevant keywords extracted from the query image, when the evidence is reachable only by combining the two. On Mem-Gallery, V-Mem reaches an LLM-judge score of 0.82 versus 0.56 for the second best, with the largest margin on questions carrying an image (0.87, no baseline above 0.47); on LoCoMo it scores 0.69 versus 0.58.

When a multimodal AI agent is asked to forget a fact, current memory systems usually delete the text entry and report success. We find that the fact can remain recoverable from retained user images, including images tagged to entirely different facts, because VLMs use implicit visual cues at inference time. We introduce the Information Provenance Graph (IPG), a taxonomy that classifies memory representations by deletion affordance. The IPG reveals that deletion fails through multiple channels. Our benchmark, MemLeak, measures this across a deletion cascade: direct probing of deletion-capable systems yields <1%, but retained correlated text enables 18.3% recovery, and retained images enable 12.0% recovery (0.0% blind baseline, 0.3% FPR) -- with 47% of image leaks not text-recoverable. Content-aware semantic deletion reduces the image residual to 2.0%. The residual appears across multiple VLMs, a production memory system, and real Unsplash-licensed photographs. Dual-annotator human validation (kappa = 0.88) confirms judge reliability.