Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

SRRM: A Retrieval-Reconstruction Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Context Memory in Small Language Models

Summary

This paper introduces SRRM, a benchmark that jointly evaluates targeted retrieval and global information reconstruction, along with the Memory Preservation Ratio (MPR) metric. Experiments on Qwen2.5 models (0.5B, 1.5B, 3B) show that reconstruction performance deteriorates much faster than retrieval accuracy as context grows, and that increasing parameter count does not necessarily improve long-context memory preservation.

SourcearXiv Computational LinguisticsAuthor: Christopher Alberto Hamonangan
SRRM: A Retrieval-Reconstruction Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Context Memory in Small Language Models
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 4 Aug 2026]

Title:SRRM: A Retrieval-Reconstruction Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Context Memory in Small Language Models

View a PDF of the paper titled SRRM: A Retrieval-Reconstruction Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Context Memory in Small Language Models, by Christopher Alberto Hamonangan

View PDF

Abstract:Small Language Models (SLMs) are increasingly deployed on consumer-grade hardware, yet their ability to preserve information across progressively longer contexts remains insufficiently understood. Existing benchmarks primarily evaluate retrieval-oriented tasks, providing limited insight into whether successful retrieval reflects comprehensive long-context memory preservation. To address this limitation, this paper introduces Simple Retrieval-Reconstruction Memory (SRRM), a lightweight and fully reproducible benchmark that jointly evaluates Targeted Retrieval and Global Information Reconstruction. This study also proposes the Memory Preservation Ratio (MPR), a benchmark-level metric that quantifies the relationship between retrieval and reconstruction performance. SRRM was evaluated using a synthetic dataset on three Qwen2.5 models (0.5B, 1.5B, and 3B parameters) across context loads ranging from 10 to 100 factual statements. Experimental results show that reconstruction performance deteriorated substantially faster than retrieval accuracy as contextual information increased, indicating that retrieval alone is insufficient to characterize long-context memory preservation. Among the evaluated models, Qwen2.5-1.5B achieved the highest retrieval accuracy (86.7%), reconstruction performance (45.7%), and MPR (0.53), outperforming the larger Qwen2.5-3B model (72.2%, 18.5%, and 0.26, respectively). These findings demonstrate that increasing parameter count does not necessarily improve long-context memory preservation. Overall, SRRM provides a reproducible and extensible benchmark for systematically evaluating long-context memory while revealing complementary memory behaviors that remain hidden under retrieval-only evaluation frameworks.

Comments: 37 pages, 20 tables, 13 figures

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

Cite as: arXiv:2611.05386 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2611.05386v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.05386

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Christopher Alberto Hamonangan [view email] [v1] Tue, 4 Aug 2026 12:36:39 UTC (2,766 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled SRRM: A Retrieval-Reconstruction Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Context Memory in Small Language Models, by Christopher Alberto Hamonangan

View PDF

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.CL

new | recent | 2026-11

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

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

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • SRRM is a lightweight, reproducible benchmark that jointly evaluates targeted retrieval and global information reconstruction.
  • The Memory Preservation Ratio (MPR) quantifies the relationship between retrieval and reconstruction performance.
  • Qwen2.5-1.5B outperformed the larger Qwen2.5-3B on retrieval accuracy (86.7% vs 72.2%), reconstruction (45.7% vs 18.5%), and MPR (0.53 vs 0.26).
  • Reconstruction performance degrades substantially faster than retrieval accuracy as context load increases, indicating retrieval alone is insufficient.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.