mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Learning What to Remember: A Cognitively Grounded Multi-Factor Value Model for Agentic Memory

arXiv 2606.12945 ↗First posted 11 Jun 2026cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent memory systems

Abstract (arXiv)

Long-running LLM agents accumulate interaction histories far larger than any context window, forcing a standing decision: what to encode deeply, what to forget, and what to retrieve under a fixed memory budget. Production systems answer with semantic similarity or recency -- both mis-specified for the forgetting decision, which is made at consolidation time before the future query is known. We propose a multi-factor memory value function V(m)=sumi wi fi(m) over seven interpretable factors (emotional intensity, goal relevance, value alignment, self/user relevance, task utility, reliability, and usage history) drawn from cognitive psychology, whose weights are learned from a downstream objective by a gradient-free optimiser, and whose single scalar uniformly controls encoding depth, forget risk, and retrieval rank. We make a methodological point: on LongMemEval, scoring goal relevance against the held-out evaluation question saturates gold-evidence retention at ≈ 0.98 -- this measures retrieval, not forgetting. In the realistic blind regime, a learned multi-factor value retains 0.770 ± 0.011 of gold evidence across 479 usable cases, versus 0.657 for uniform weights, 0.518 for the best single factor, and 0.368 for recency; every paired gap's 95% bootstrap CI is above zero, and a neural network over the same factors ties the linear model. The learned weights are interpretable -- reliability, emotional intensity, and self/user relevance dominate, while query-time goal similarity is correctly down-weighted for the forgetting decision. A controlled synthetic task with planted confounds confirms the learner recovers a separating weighting (1.00 retention) where uniform weighting fails (0.62). The substrate is open-source; all experiments run on a single CPU with no API calls.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent memory systems, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 9 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2026.

Builds on

9 of 21 references.

References · 9

  1. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
  2. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
  3. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behaviorcited by 3,500
  4. 2023MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systemscited by 1,295
  5. 2024LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memorycited by 656
  6. 2023MemoryBank: Enhancing Large Language Models with Long-Term Memorycited by 539
  7. 2023Cognitive Architectures for Language Agentscited by 422
  8. 2016The CMA Evolution Strategy: A Tutorialcited by 364
  9. 2025MemOS: A Memory OS for AI Systemcited by 129

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026RaMem: Contextual Reinstatement for Long-term Agentic Memory
  2. 2026From Recall to Forgetting: Benchmarking Long-Term Memory for Personalized Agents
  3. 2026What to Keep, What to Forget: A Rate--Distortion View of Memory Compaction in LLMs and Agents
  4. 2026Memory Control Signals Emerge Before Action in Long Horizon Agents
  5. 2026When Does Memory Help? A Cost-Aware Evaluation of Long-Term Memory in Tool-Using LLM Agents
  6. 2026The Epistemics of Agent Memory: Measuring, and Governing, the Consolidation Decision in Long-Horizon LLM Agents
  7. 2025Forgetting as a Feature: Cognitive Alignment of Large Language Models
  8. 2026Memory as a Controlled Process: Learned Adaptive Memory Management for LLM Agents