Bookkeeping, Composition, or Unreachable Gold? Reading MemoryAgentBench's Conflict-Resolution Scores Against a Frozen Last-Write Resolver
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
arXiv:2610.09193 (cs)
[Submitted on 6 Oct 2026]
Title:Bookkeeping, Composition, or Unreachable Gold? Reading MemoryAgentBench's Conflict-Resolution Scores Against a Frozen Last-Write Resolver
View a PDF of the paper titled Bookkeeping, Composition, or Unreachable Gold? Reading MemoryAgentBench's Conflict-Resolution Scores Against a Frozen Last-Write Resolver, by Egor Pakhomov and 1 other authors
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
Abstract:MemoryAgentBench's Conflict Resolution split is read as measuring "selective forgetting". We execute the benchmark's own rule - the newest statement about a fact wins - as a zero-learning resolver frozen on one of the four fact lists. Under the official metric the rule answers 80.25% of the questions (74.5% on the three held-out lists). Of the rest, 67 items have a released gold that the last-write graph cannot reach but overwritten statements would ("The capital of India is New Delhi." superseded by "The capital of India is Grosseto."; gold New Delhi); such items are a third of the multi-hop questions at 262K. Two long-context models and our pre-registered approximate re-implementation of the benchmark's BM25 agent, one retained run per item and outcomes only, score 84.7%, 82.6% and 41.6% on the items the rule solves against 10.4%, 11.9% and 6.0% on those 67. The failures are a reachability split plus a small parser-scope residual; the per-item split, not the aggregate, is the unit at which a score here can be read.
| Comments: | Accepted at the IAB Workshop (Interpreting Agent Behavior) at NeurIPS 2026 (non-archival). 19 pages |
| Subjects: | Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2610.09193 [cs.AI] |
| (or arXiv:2610.09193v1 [cs.AI] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.09193
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Full-text links:
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
View a PDF of the paper titled Bookkeeping, Composition, or Unreachable Gold? Reading MemoryAgentBench's Conflict-Resolution Scores Against a Frozen Last-Write Resolver, by Egor Pakhomov and 1 other authors
Additional Features
References & Citations
Loading...
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
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 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
Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Recommenders and Search Tools
Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
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.
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.