Can Agent Memory Systems Track Evolving State?

LLM-based agents increasingly operate in persistent environments where they must store, update, and reason over information across many sessions. While prior benchmarks evaluate only single-entity updates, MEME defines six tasks spanning the full space defined by the multi-entity and evolving axes, including three not scored by prior work: Cascade and Absence (dependency reasoning) and Deletion (post-removal state). Evaluating six memory systems spanning three memory paradigms on 100 controlled episodes, we find that all systems collapse on dependency reasoning under the default configuration (Cascade: 3%, Absence: 1% in average accuracy) despite adequate static retrieval performance. Prompt optimization, deeper retrieval, reduced filler noise, and most stronger LLMs fail to close this gap. Only a file-based agent paired with Claude Opus 4.7 as its internal LLM partially closes the gap, but at ~70x the baseline cost, indicating closure currently depends on configurations that are not practical at scale. Code and data are available on the project page: https://seokwonjung-jay.github.io/meme-eval/.

LLM agents increasingly maintain long-term memory of user facts across sessions. Yet such memory is usually evaluated by aggregating accuracy over question rows or episodes. Because this approach scores question rows independently, even when several questions probe the same fact, it cannot show how that fact behaves as conditions change. We introduce MemTrace, a benchmark whose unit of measurement is the knowledge point: a single typed fact about the user, rather than an individual question. MemTrace probes each fact along three controlled dimensions: memory age, defined by how many sessions ago the fact appeared in the history; question type, covering current state, earlier state, and trajectory of change; and evidence condition, covering present, missing, and contradicted-by-false-premise settings. Evaluating 13 memory-system configurations across four paradigms, we find that similar pooled accuracy hides different failures: recovering a fact's current and earlier states does not imply tracking how it changed, and safe abstention does not imply correcting a false premise. The dominant bottleneck is evidence use, not retrieval: when systems fail, the evidence was retrievable 10 times more often than it was missing. These results suggest that improving long-term memory requires better use of reachable evidence, not simply more storage or retrieval.

Long-running agents rely on memory of their past interactions for task state, such as what has been completed and which conditions still hold. Such state is usually a derived state. No record states it, and it must be computed by rules from multiple records of an evolving history. Existing memory benchmarks score only the final answer, with no reference for the intermediate states behind it. A wrong answer therefore cannot be traced to the state that was missed, and a state that silently became outdated goes undetected. We present MemDerive, a diagnostic benchmark for agent memory over evolving data. It specifies each scenario symbolically, derives exact gold answers with Datalog, records the gold derivation DAG and the supporting events of every query, and renders the history in natural language with fictional entities and distractors. Its 10 scenarios contain 4,692 events and 1,503 queries whose difficulty varies along access, evolution, and composition. On this ground truth, MemDerive evaluates answer reliability, diagnoses failures by probing the nodes of the gold derivation DAG, and tracks whether answers stay correct as events arrive. Our evaluation of four memory systems reveals failures that final-answer benchmarks hide. On derived state, every memory system falls behind simple BM25 retrieval, although the same answer model reaches 96.01% when given the supporting events. Most failures are ungathered, as a system holds the missing intermediate state but does not retrieve it for the question that needs it. Memory systems also rarely propagate implicit changes, which no new record states. These results suggest three principles for memory design. Gather inputs along the derivation, store rules with their versions, and maintain derived states through recorded dependencies.