Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

When Does Memory Help? A Cost-Aware Evaluation of Long-Term Memory in Tool-Using LLM Agents

Summary

arXiv:2609.05441v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-term memory for LLM agents is evaluated today by conversational recall benchmarks (LoCoMo, LongMemEval), which measure question answering over dialogue history, not whether remembered facts change what a tool-using agent does. We present MERIT (Memory Evaluation for Realistic Instrumented Tasks), a benchmark and harness that measures the marginal utility of memory for task-executing agents under explicit cost accounting. MERIT provides episodic tool-use tasks in three domains whose dependence on earlier-episode facts is verified by an automated leak check; a difficulty ladder ending in updated-fact recall; controlled memory corruption; and full token and dollar metering of every memory operation. Across 23,440 scored episodes ($42.57),…

SourcearXiv AIAuthor: Shweta Mishra, Shashank Mishra
When Does Memory Help? A Cost-Aware Evaluation of Long-Term Memory in Tool-Using LLM Agents
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 26 Jul 2026]

Title:When Does Memory Help? A Cost-Aware Evaluation of Long-Term Memory in Tool-Using LLM Agents

View a PDF of the paper titled When Does Memory Help? A Cost-Aware Evaluation of Long-Term Memory in Tool-Using LLM Agents, by Shweta Mishra and 1 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Long-term memory for LLM agents is evaluated today by conversational recall benchmarks (LoCoMo, LongMemEval), which measure question answering over dialogue history, not whether remembered facts change what a tool-using agent does. We present MERIT (Memory Evaluation for Realistic Instrumented Tasks), a benchmark and harness that measures the marginal utility of memory for task-executing agents under explicit cost accounting. MERIT provides episodic tool-use tasks in three domains whose dependence on earlier-episode facts is verified by an automated leak check; a difficulty ladder ending in updated-fact recall; controlled memory corruption; and full token and dollar metering of every memory operation. Across 23,440 scored episodes ($42.57), a two-generation pilot on gpt-4.1-mini and a preregistered 3-model x 3-seed grid (GPT-4.1, Claude Haiku 4.5; memory side held fixed), memory lifts dependent-task success from a leak-verified floor of 0.00 to 0.55-1.00. On updated facts, embedding retrieval collapses unpredictably (0.30-0.95 across models; max seed gap 0.45), and agents act on a correctly retrieved value only 55% of the time, while update-on-write stores (a structured fact store and, notably, LLM summarization) remain at 0.70-1.00; the hybrid is worse than the fact store alone. A latest-generation spot-check (Claude Sonnet 5, gated on a clean full-replay control) reproduces the pattern. Swapping a memory's implementation moves task success by up to 60 points, and full replay is never economical: the best condition per domain delivers 2.7-3.9x its marginal utility per dollar. We release the benchmark, harness, and all traces.

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Cite as: arXiv:2609.05441 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2609.05441v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.05441

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Shweta Mishra [view email] [v1] Sun, 26 Jul 2026 07:42:00 UTC (65 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled When Does Memory Help? A Cost-Aware Evaluation of Long-Term Memory in Tool-Using LLM Agents, by Shweta Mishra and 1 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS

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

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.05441v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-term memory for LLM agents is evaluated today by conversational recall benchmarks (LoCoMo, LongMemEval), which measure questio…

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