AgentMemBench: A Systematic Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Term Memory Management Strategies in Conversational AI Agents
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
arXiv:2608.00009 (cs)
[Submitted on 16 Jun 2026]
Title:AgentMemBench: A Systematic Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Term Memory Management Strategies in Conversational AI Agents
Authors:Ahmed Cherif
View a PDF of the paper titled AgentMemBench: A Systematic Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Term Memory Management Strategies in Conversational AI Agents, by Ahmed Cherif
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Long-term memory remains a critical bottleneck for conversational AI agents, whose finite context windows cannot support coherent recall across thousands of turns. We present AgentMemBench, a unified, reproducible benchmark evaluating five memory management strategies under identical conditions: in-context windowing (ICW), external key-value store (EKV), graph-based episodic memory (GEM), compression-based summarisation (CBS), and web-augmented memory (WAM). All are assessed across three public datasets covering long-term multi-session dialogue (LoCoMo), task-oriented document grounding (MultiDoc2Dial), and persona-grounded multi-session chat (MSC), using Recall@k, MRR, nDCG@k, Answer F1, an LLM-judge Faithfulness score, Memory Footprint, and Latency over 491 annotated question turns. Generation and judging both use Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct (4-bit), with greedy decoding for determinism. Our results show that (1) EKV dominates on every quality axis (macro Recall@5 0.792, MRR 0.677, F1 0.156, Faithfulness 0.354); (2) long-range recall is decisive: on LoCoMo, where the gold turn lies many sessions back, ICW, WAM, GEM, and CBS retrieve almost nothing (Recall@5 <= 0.005) while EKV alone reaches 0.573, showing that recency windows, summaries, and entity graphs collapse at long horizons and only dense retrieval scales; (3) CBS is the runner-up on retrieval (0.556); (4) WAM equals ICW on in-corpus recall by construction, since external results carry no in-corpus provenance; and (5) EKV's recall advantage carries a footprint cost (~5,100 vs ~300 tokens for ICW/WAM), an explicit accuracy-efficiency trade-off. We additionally evaluate two published memory systems (MemGPT/Letta, HippoRAG) against the same harness, and release all code, environment, and result artefacts for full reproducibility.
| Comments: | 22 pages, 3 figures submitted on Neural Computing and Applications |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) |
| ACM classes: | I.2.7; H.3.3 |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2608.00009 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2608.00009v1 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.00009
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
|
Full-text links:
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
View a PDF of the paper titled AgentMemBench: A Systematic Benchmark for Evaluating Long-Term Memory Management Strategies in Conversational AI Agents, by Ahmed Cherif
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.