arXiv (All)
open access
Compaction, decay and reinforcement in a two-tier conversational memory: a paired evaluation against retrieval-augmented generation
A conversational agent that remembers has to decide what to keep. Retrieval-augmented generation keeps the transcript and searches it; the alternative is to compact each turn into atomic facts and search those. We compare the two on LoCoMo, with both arms answering all 1,985 questions in one window,
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
- Gated Memory: Admission-Controlled Memory Formation for Conversational AI#1248550
- Self-Keyed In-Parameter Memorization for External Memory-Free Dialogue Recall in Frozen Language Models#1468552
- Towards Continuous Cognition: A Human-Centric Model for AI Long-Term Conversational Memory#714062
- To Consolidate or not to Consolidate? Evaluating the Impact of Consolidation in Multi-Reference Training using Peer Reviews#1037488
- Beyond-RAG: Question Identification and Answer Generation in Real-Time Conversations#821672
Record · ID 1626218
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