arXiv (All)
open access
When Does Experience Memory Help Closed-Loop LLM Driving Agents? A Controlled Evaluation with Resampled Warmup Pools, Token-Matched Fillers, and Audited Baselines
artificial-intelligencecomputation-and-languagecomputer-vision-and-pattern-recognitionmachine-learningrobotics
When does experience memory help a closed-loop LLM driving agent? Published gains cannot say, because the two factors we find to matter most, which warmup experiences the pool contains and what any injected tokens do to the prompt, are controlled in none of them. We answer with a controlled evaluati
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- What Survives When Activation Steering Is Used as Memory#1325854
- Understanding Stage-Wise Utility-Risk Trade-offs in LLM Agent Memory#622447
- Manufactured Confidence: How Memory Consolidation Turns Hearsay into Confident Facts#321769
- Recall What Is Missing: Composing Evidence from Long-Term Agent Memory#1326892
- Understanding Stage-Wise Utility-Risk Trade-offs in LLM Agent Memory#799399
Record · ID 1403510
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive