Memory-native evolution requires making memory an intrinsic capability of foundation models, enabling them to continuously accumulate and utilize information. To this end, we introduce MemT-1.0, a new architecture of memory foundation models that internalize memory as part of model computation. Building on Metis, MemT-1.0 employs Gated DeltaNet-2 with a stable token-level memory update mechanism within each turn. We further introduce Mixture-of-Storage to scale native memory capacity. Following a deliberate backbone preparation, we develop a two-stage training pipeline consisting of continued pre-training and post-training, supported by 34B tokens of training data and efficient training and inference infrastructure. We release a model family comprising MemT-1.0-Nano and MemT-1.0-Flash, and conduct a comprehensive evaluation of memory and general capabilities. The results show that they outperform the parametric memory baselines on average and remain competitive with retrieval-augmented methods, while largely preserving general capabilities. At a history length of 128K tokens, MemT-1.0-Nano achieves approximately 1.86× end-to-end inference speedup and a 66× reduction in persistent storage relative to full context KV cache. By internalizing retrieved procedural experience, MemT-1.0 improves task success on agentic tasks, providing a practical step toward memory-native evolution.
Figures & tables
Figure 3: Inference efficiency and storage overhead of MemT-1.0-Nano.
Figure 4: Architecture of MemT-1.0. MemT-1.0 equips causal language models with native memory that evolves across interaction steps. Each selected Transformer block is augmented with a native memory block that performs parallel original and memory attention. The memory mechanism comprises dynamic local memory and trainable hyper memory, together with native memory storage and utilization procedures for updating and retrieving persistent information.
Figure 5: Scaling native memory capacity. MoS expands each native memory block into multiple memory experts and employs separate dense storage and utilization routing over shared expert addresses.
Window size (complete steps)
Peak memory (GiB)
Memory reduction
F+B (ms)
Time increase
2048 tokens (1 step)
47.83→6.03
87.4%
462.7→493.5
6.6%
4096 tokens (2 steps)
47.83→9.49
80.1%
463.0→470.6
1.6%
Table 1: Memory-time tradeoff for one MoS memory block on a single GPU at a 32K-token pack length. Arrows denote whole-pack to windowed execution. The values are medians.
Figure 6: Data and training scaling of MemT-1.0-Nano. Memory performance over two consecutive post-training epochs. Blue circles show the average score on the left axis, and red squares show LoCoMo accuracy on the right axis.
Figure 7: Memory capacity scaling during post-training after 400 CPT steps. We compare MoS configurations with 2 and 4 memory experts at matched post-training steps, reporting the average score and the LoCoMo score.
Figure 8: Left: End-to-end latency includes history preparation and generation of a 128-token response. Right: Query TTFT measures the time from query execution to the first generated token, excluding history preparation.
Figure 9: Results of storage overhead. Per-trajectory persistent storage on BEAM histories of increasing length.
Figure 10: Impact of online low-rank decomposition on memory performance and storage.
Figure 11: Experience-guided agentic framework with MemT-1.0-Nano. Retrieved experience is stored in textual context or native memory to guide subsequent actions.
Appendix figures & tables14 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Configuration
MemT-1.0-Nano
MemT-1.0-Flash
Backbone
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
DeepSeek-V4-Flash, after backbone preparation
Hidden width / decoder layers
2048 / 40
4096 / 43
Memory layers
3,7,…,39 (10 layers)
4,6,…,42 (20 layers)
Memory-layer type
Full attention
Compressed sparse attention
Memory Hq/Hkv
16 / 16
64 / 64
Memory dk/dv
256 / 256
512 / 512
Appendix
Table 6: Backbone and native-memory configuration. State size counts the persistent memory matrices for one trajectory, excluding model weights and current-step KV caches.
Setting
MemT-1.0-Nano
MemT-1.0-Flash
TP / PP / CP / EP
1 / 1 / 1 / 8
1 / 4 / 2 / 8
Logical DP / accumulation steps
64 / 1
12 / 16
Global batch (packs)
64
192
Maximum pack / storage step
65536 / 2048 tokens
65536 / 2048 tokens
Post-training target
Online backbone, Top-64 KL
Online backbone, Top-64 KL
Temperature / KL / CE weight
1 / 1 / 0
1 / 1 / 0
Appendix
Table 7: Execution and distillation settings for the evaluated checkpoints. TP, PP, CP, and EP denote tensor, pipeline, context, and expert parallelism. DP counts logical data-parallel replicas. EP partitions backbone experts within that topology.
Figure 12: An analytical single-step erase example with D=I and no write term. Both panels use the same input y=e and orthonormal {k,e} basis.
Figure 13: Construction of experience-conditioned training trajectories. Retrieved experience is added at selected breakpoints in unsuccessful trajectories, and execution resumes from the same state. Continuations that pass the task tests are retained as training samples comprising the trajectory prefix, experience, and successful continuation.
Statistic
Train
Validation
Test (Verified)
Number of repositories
537
176
12
Number of tasks
2,396
266
500
Appendix
Table 9: Task and repository counts for the training and validation splits and SWE-bench Verified.
Statistic
Value
Calculation or description
Original trajectories
18,820
Target rollouts generated by Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Unsolved original trajectories
14,649 (77.8%)
14,649/18,820
Breakpoint–experience variants
199,500
7,901 usable trajectories produced 19,950 retained breakpoints
Successful experience
45,481 (22.8%)
45,481/199,500
Appendix
Table 10: Training data construction statistics and experience intervention outcomes.
Figure 14: Training loss and validation NLL under CE and KD objectives. Within each panel, the left and right columns show training loss and validation NLL, respectively. Solid blue curves denote Max-2, and dashed orange curves denote Max-3.
Validation NLL
Avg. Success (%)
Configuration
CE
KD
CE
KD
First-Step-Max2
0.3452
0.4304
12.5
52.0
First-Step-Max3
0.3373
0.4267
34.1
52.0
Full-Suffix-Max2
0.1795
0.2005
37.5
54.3
Full-Suffix-Max3
0.1771
0.1996
22.7
52.7
Appendix
Table 11: Validation NLL and preliminary agent performance under CE and KD. Average success rates are measured on the 100-task development subset of SWE-bench Verified with three runs per task. Validation NLL uses hard-label targets; lower is better.
Configuration
Avg. Success
pass@3
pass^3
First-Step-Max2
52.00
65.00
38.00
First-Step-Max3
52.00
61.00
42.00
Full-Suffix-Max2
54.33
66.00
42.00
Full-Suffix-Max3
52.67
66.00
36.00
Appendix
Table 12: Metis KD configurations on the 100-task development subset of SWE-bench Verified under Before Execution. All values are percentages; bold values indicate the highest scores in each column.
Figure 15: Agentic coding performance on SWE-bench Verified and SWE-bench Multilingual under Before Execution (top) and Harness-Triggered (bottom). Each task is evaluated in three runs.
Method
Avg. Success
pass@3
pass^3
Before Execution
No Experience
60.00
73.67
45.33
Textual Experience: Fixed Rank-1
64.22
72.67
56.33
Textual Experience: Fixed Rank-2
61.89
72.67
51.33
Textual Experience: Fixed Rank-3
63.78
74.00
54.33
Textual Experience: Per-Task Best
70.56
78.67
61.67
Appendix
Table 13: Textual Experience selection on SWE-bench Multilingual (300 tasks). Fixed Rank- k uses the single experience at rank k ; Per-Task Best selects among three candidates using evaluation outcomes. All values are percentages.
Configuration
Value
Hidden dimension
2048
Memory experts
4
Memory heads per expert / head dimension
16 / 256
Router projection rank
128
Decay-gate / output-gate projection rank
256 / 256
Parameter and projection / memory-state precision
BF16 / FP32
Appendix
Table 14: Configuration of the MoS memory-block experiment.
Pack length (tokens)
Window budget (tokens)
Whole-pack memory (GiB)
Windowed memory (GiB)
Whole-pack F+B (ms)
Windowed F+B (ms)
8192
2048
12.37
4.85
102.1
122.9
8192
4096
12.37
8.36
102.1
117.4
16384
2048
24.19
5.23
211.6
246.1
16384
4096
24.19
8.77
211.6
235.1
32768
2048
47.83
6.03
462.7
493.5
32768
4096
47.83
9.49
463.0
470.6
Appendix
Table 15: Full memory and time results for the MoS memory block. Each row is an independently measured whole-pack/window pair; values are medians.
Pack length (tokens)
Window budget (tokens)
Whole-pack median [Q25, Q75]
Windowed median [Q25, Q75]
Standard deviation (whole / windowed)
8192
2048
102.10 [102.08, 102.12]
122.87 [122.86, 122.88]
0.03 / 0.02
8192
4096
102.11 [102.10, 102.12]
117.42 [117.41, 117.45]
0.05 / 0.03
16384
2048
211.55 [211.43, 212.02]
246.11 [246.02, 246.42]
37.19 / 0.26
16384
4096
211.61 [211.45, 211.87]
235.07 [234.98, 235.39]
0.30 / 0.27
32768
2048
462.71 [462.37, 463.87]
493.48 [492.91, 494.38]
22.22 / 0.94
32768
4096
462.96 [462.42, 463.68]
470.58 [469.84, 471.46]
0.76 / 38.01
Appendix
Table 16: F+B timing variability in milliseconds. Intervals are the 25th and 75th percentiles; standard deviations use all measured samples.
Memory-augmented language models combine persistent or temporary memory with neural computation to retain, retrieve, and use information beyond the active context.
Recent advances in AI agents have increasingly internalized native capabilities into their underlying foundation models, giving rise to multimodal foundation models and large reasoning models. However, agent memory is still primarily implemented through external modules, leaving the native memory capability largely unexplored. In this paper, we take a first step toward this direction by introducing memory foundation models, which empower foundation models with native memory capabilities. We formalize native memory from two perspectives: a persistent and dynamically evolving memory state within the backbone, and native memory procedures that autonomously store and utilize information through model computation. We show that native memory offers advantages in architecture, end-to-end optimization, and efficiency. Based on this formulation, we propose Metis, the first prototype of memory foundation models. Metis introduces a new architecture that equips a foundation model with a native memory state, allowing historical information to be compressed into the model and accessed through memory attention. We construct large-scale memory-specific training data and introduce multiple optimization objectives to acquire these native memory procedures through mid-training. The online memory maintenance of Metis is gradient-free, and the memory update requires only a forward pass. At inference time, all learned model weights remain frozen, while the native memory states are autonomously transformed through standard forward computation. Through extensive experiments, we show that Metis exhibits native memory capabilities and further provide a detailed analysis of its strengths, limitations, and behaviors. To facilitate future research on memory foundation models, we release our project and model checkpoints.
Zeyu Zhang, Ziliang Guo, Yihang Sun +14
MemTensor (Shanghai) Technology Co., Ltd. · Shanghai Jiao Tong University · National University of Singapore +2
Large language models increasingly need to accumulate and reuse historical information in long-term assistants and agent systems. Simply expanding the context window is costly and often fails to ensure effective context utilization. We propose δ-mem, a lightweight memory mechanism that augments a frozen full-attention backbone with a compact online state of associative memory. δ-mem compresses past information into a fixed-size state matrix updated by delta-rule learning, and uses its readout to generate low-rank corrections to the backbone's attention computation during generation. With only an 8×8 online memory state, δ-mem improves the average score to 1.10× that of the frozen backbone and 1.15× that of the strongest non-δ-mem memory baseline. It achieves larger gains on memory-heavy benchmarks, reaching 1.31× on MemoryAgentBench and 1.20× on LoCoMo, while largely preserving general capabilities. These results show that effective memory can be realized through a compact online state directly coupled with attention computation, without full fine-tuning, backbone replacement, or explicit context extension.
Jingdi Lei, Di Zhang, Junxian Li +7
Nanyang Technological University · Mind Lab · Fudan University +3
Long-horizon complex tasks require foundation models to accumulate information, maintain internal states, and adapt over extended interactions. Safety should be an intrinsic property of the model itself, rather than a behavioral constraint relying solely on external safeguards or post-hoc alignment such as supervised fine-tuning. This motivates Safety from Within, where safety-relevant capabilities are represented and invoked through the model's native computation. We present Safin-1, a family of foundation models realizing this principle through memory routing and state evolution. Safin-1 is built on Memory-Anchor Routing across Context History (MARCH), a network architecture that maintains structured memory states and selectively retrieves relevant historical information through content-conditioned routing. It supports test-time adaptation of persistent capability states without repeatedly modifying the backbone, enabling controlled specialization over a shared foundation. We investigate this interface on downstream safety tasks through a Safety State, demonstrating effective state-based adaptation with substantial safety improvements. More broadly, the routed-state interface unifies contextual memory and persistent capability adaptation within the model's native computation, reframing memory from a passive record of prior context into an active substrate for maintaining and evolving model behavior. Evaluations across general capabilities, long-context understanding, retrieval, and efficiency further validate Safin-1. These findings provide a path toward safety as a state-native and adaptively maintainable capability. This work is only an initial architectural exploration of Safety from Within, and substantial further work is needed to realize this broader vision.