# A Benchmark and Diagnostic Study of Epistemic Admission in Shared Agent Memory

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.30813 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.30813/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 50 of its 56 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 50)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Gemma 3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.19786/) (2025)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [Evaluating Very Long-Term Conversational Memory of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.17753/) (2024)
- [Mem0: Building Production-Ready AI Agents with Scalable Long-Term Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19413/) (2025)
- [LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.10813/) (2024)
- [AgentPoison: Red-teaming LLM Agents via Poisoning Memory or Knowledge Bases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12784/) (2024)
- [Adaptive Chameleon or Stubborn Sloth: Revealing the Behavior of Large Language Models in Knowledge Conflicts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13300/) (2023)
- [MQuAKE: Assessing Knowledge Editing in Language Models via Multi-Hop Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14795/) (2023)
- [Evaluating Memory in LLM Agents via Incremental Multi-Turn Interactions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.05257/) (2025)
- [AVeriTeC: A Dataset for Real-world Claim Verification with Evidence from the Web](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13117/) (2023)
- [Memory Injection Attacks on LLM Agents via Query-Only Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.03704/) (2025)
- [G-Memory: Tracing Hierarchical Memory for Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.07398/) (2025)
- [ConflictBank: A Benchmark for Evaluating the Influence of Knowledge Conflicts in LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.12076/) (2024)
- [A-MemGuard: A Proactive Defense Framework for LLM-Based Agent Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.02373/) (2025)
- [Collaborative Memory: Multi-User Memory Sharing in LLM Agents with Dynamic Access Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.18279/) (2025)
- [Hindsight is 20/20: Building Agent Memory that Retains, Recalls, and Reflects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.12818/) (2025)
- [From Agent Traces to Trust: A Survey of Evidence Tracing and Execution Provenance in LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.04990/) (2026)
- [Nine Judges, Two Effective Votes: Correlated Errors Undermine LLM Evaluation Panels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.29800/) (2026)
- [Adaptive Memory Admission Control for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.04549/) (2026)
- [AgentAbstain: Do LLM Agents Know When Not to Act?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.10059/) (2026)
- [MemTX: Transactional Belief Commit for Stateful Agent Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.23929/) (2026)
- [GateMem: Benchmarking Memory Governance in Multi-Principal Shared-Memory Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.18829/) (2026)
- [Governed Shared Memory for Multi-Agent LLM Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.24535/) (2026)
- [MemSyco-Bench: Benchmarking Sycophancy in Agent Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.01071/) (2026)
- [Improving Wikipedia Verifiability with AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.06220/) (2022)
- [Belief Memory: Agent Memory Under Partial Observability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.05583/) (2026)
- [Graph-Native Cognitive Memory for AI Agents: Formal Belief Revision Semantics for Versioned Memory Architectures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.17244/) (2026)
- [Capability Minimization as a Safety Primitive: Risk-Aware Causal Gating for Least-Privilege LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.13884/) (2026)
- [When Does Belief-Based Agent Memory Help? Reliability-Conditional Updating and Provenance-Capped Poisoning Defense](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.22030/) (2026)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [What Breaks in Multi-Image Schema Application? Factorial Oracle Interventions Reveal an Instance-Information Bottleneck](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.19611/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Evaluating claim admission in shared agent memory is challenging because repeated claims may be mistaken for independent evidence. An agent may copy or paraphrase a retrieved belief, while admitting a false claim exposes subsequent agents to it. To study this problem, we introduce the Correlated Promotion Benchmark (CPB), which evaluates whether candidate claims should be admitted to shared memory.CPB-Static constructs a frozen test split from publicly annotated sources with fixed gold actions. CPB-Live runs multi-agent teams over a shared store, records all writes and retrievals, and tracks source lineage defined by each scenario. A separate consumer answers from the store alone. We evaluate eight admission policies across four agent families. Our results show that policies which deduplicate sources reject many true claims alongside false ones, whereas policies preserving answer coverage admit nearly as many false claims as unrestricted sharing. Gating on declared source type reduces false adoption to 0.06--0.09, compared with 0.22--0.47 for other answering policies. Once an uncontested false belief enters memory, the consumer asserts it in 0.97--0.99 of probes across all families. No non-oracle policy consistently rejects false claims across verbatim copies, paraphrases, and paraphrases declared authoritative. These findings reveal the limitations of admission policies without access to source lineage.