CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning May 12, 2026

Human-Inspired Memory Architecture for LLM Agents

arXiv AI Archived May 12, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2605.08538v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Current LLM agents lack principled mechanisms for managing persistent memory across long interaction horizons. We present a biologically-grounded memory architecture comprising six cognitive mechanisms: (1) sleep-phase consolidation, (2) interference-based forgetting, (3) engram maturation, (4) reconsolidation upon retrieval, (5) entity knowledge graphs, and (6) hybrid multi-cue retrieval. Each mechanism addresses a specific failure mode of naive m

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 8 May 2026] Human-Inspired Memory Architecture for LLM Agents Doga Kerestecioglu, Alexei Robsky, Clemens Vasters, Anshul Sharma, Yitzhak Kesselman Current LLM agents lack principled mechanisms for managing persistent memory across long interaction horizons. We present a biologically-grounded memory architecture comprising six cognitive mechanisms: (1) sleep-phase consolidation, (2) interference-based forgetting, (3) engram maturation, (4) reconsolidation upon retrieval, (5) entity knowledge graphs, and (6) hybrid multi-cue retrieval. Each mechanism addresses a specific failure mode of naive memory accumulation. We introduce a synthetic calibration methodology that derives all pipeline thresholds without benchmark data exposure, eliminating a common source of evaluation leakage. We evaluate on two benchmarks. First, a VSCode issue-tracking dataset (13K issues, 120K events) where deduplication-based consolidation achieves 97.2% retention precision with 58% store reduction (+21.8 pp over baseline). Second, the LongMemEval personal-chat benchmark where we conduct the first streaming M-tier evaluation (475 sessions, ~540K unique turns). At a 200K-token context budget, our pipeline matches raw retrieval accuracy (70.1% vs. 71.2%, overlapping 95% CI) while exposing a tunable accuracy/store-size operating curve. At S-tier scale (50 sessions), dedup-based consolidation yields a +13.3 pp improvement in preference recall. Comments: 10 pages, 4 tables. Preprint; comments welcome Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Machine Learning (cs.LG) Cite as: arXiv:2605.08538 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2605.08538v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.08538 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Doga Kerestecioglu [view email] [v1] Fri, 8 May 2026 22:52:37 UTC (20 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-05 Change to browse by: cs cs.CL cs.IR cs.LG References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    May 12, 2026
    Archived
    May 12, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗