Write What Matters: Disentangling Token Selection from Slot Allocation in Recurrent Memory

Memory-Mediated Learning Architecture (MMLA) separates slow base parameters theta, a bounded numerical policy carrier Phi, and a bounded authoritative memory M. Predictive Dual-State Adaptation (PDSA) lets feedback update Phi while one problem remains active and lets a trusted lifecycle atomically commit one typed row or exact NULL. Later reasoning may read both states, but their writers, resets, rollback domains, and ledgers remain distinct. Realized futures supervise values only during training; deployment is causal and future-blind. We give conditional theory and falsifiable contracts for reasoning-time updates, completed-segment consolidation, predictive admission, authoritative memory, and dual-state attribution. Assumptions, counterexamples, capacity and cost ledgers, recovery duties, and identifying experiments are explicit; these are not implementation guarantees. Controlled studies show exact lifecycle execution on 300/300 held-out records for each of three seeds, calibrated retrieval gains over frozen-hidden dense and BM25 baselines, and exact typed anchor-filler transport on 240/240 held-out records per seed. These validate restricted components, not natural-language memory management or complete PDSA. Post-training studies retain positive and negative evidence. Later protocols obtain restricted readout progress, but a nine-trajectory comparison finds that matched latent readout, a full-width bridge, and bridge plus frozen text-teacher alignment all fail continuous-event qualification across both task families. A separately adapted text reference and restoration checks pass. At the September 13, 2026 evidence cutoff, no strict policy-only reasoning-time-training effect, predictive-admission oracle margin, learned future-blind admission policy, or policy-by-memory factorial advantage is established.

Long-context recall in linear-time sequence models highlights a tradeoff in how they write to memory. State-based linear models, such as state-space models (SSMs) and linear Transformers, write densely, updating the entire state for each newly arrived token, which leads to interference and makes specific past tokens hard to recover. Sliding-window attention (SWA) exhibits the opposite behavior: it writes sparsely by storing explicit token representations, but only within a fixed window, so recall drops once the relevant token is evicted. Interpolating between these models, we introduce Raven, a linear-time sequence model that maintains a fixed set of memory slots and, at each step, decays and updates only a selected subset via learned, input-dependent routing. This lets Raven mitigate SWA's position-based overwriting and hard eviction while reducing interference from dense state updates in SSMs, thereby preserving long-range content much more effectively. Across recall-intensive benchmarks, Raven is competitive with or outperforms prior linear-time baselines, achieving strong long-context recall where both SWA and SSMs sharply degrade. It remains effective when extrapolating to context lengths as large as 16x its training length, with similar gains in hybrid architectures.

Recurrent, attention-free sequence models share a structural weakness: a fading state cannot perform exact recall of something seen once, far in the past. We add to the Kathleen trunk a second memory layer -- a "notebook": a fixed-key holographic (HRR) associative store with a learned local write gate, a self-gating raw read, and write-triggered forgetting -- 25K parameters that attach to the logits of any trunk. (1) Mechanism: on a controlled needle-in-haystack task the notebook reaches 80-82% one-shot recall at 4x the training length, where the bare trunk scores ~4% and a parameter-matched attention head scores 100% inside its training length and 0% beyond it. Addressing is length-invariant by construction; the untrained memory alone recalls at 90% accuracy identically at 512, 2048 and 4096 bytes. Because the store is a linear superposition, two capabilities follow from arithmetic alone: selective unlearning (one subtraction erases one fact to chance, retained facts unharmed) and per-token attribution (counterfactual erasure names the source fact of every correct byte, 100% provenance). (2) Real text: on WikiText-2 bytes the notebook improves prediction of repeated rare words by +0.15-0.27 bits/byte, the gain growing with the distance between mentions and holding zero-shot at 4x training length; write-triggered forgetting eliminates memory pollution at 8x length (first-mention cost +0.33 -> -0.004). (3) Scope and scale: a parameter-matched attention head does generalize on natural-text repetition, so the notebook's claim is exact recall at O(L); on a WikiText-103 ladder (8 to 512 MB) the zero-shot repeat gain rises monotonically. All experiments are pre-registered, seeds reported, and reproducible on a single free-tier GPU.