GAM (General Agentic Memory) critiques the dominant paradigm in AI memory systems. The post's core claim: existing systems treat memory as "pre-digested answers," while GAM argues memory should support search, not replace it—analogous to how a JIT compiler optimizes at runtime instead of pre-translating all code.
Key points
Why AOT-style memory fails
- Current systems (MemGPT, Mem0, A-Mem) pre-compress history offline into lightweight memories, then look them up at runtime.
- Three flaws: irreversible information loss from compression, static structure that can't adapt to dynamic queries, and domain-dependent hand-crafted heuristics.
- Ablation evidence: memory alone without the Researcher scores only 27.50 avg F1 vs 53.18 for full GAM.
- Memorizer (offline): for each new session, generates a memo capturing the session's key contribution, and stores a *page* = {contextual header, full raw content} in a page-store. Nothing is discarded. Headers draw on BGE landmark retrieval / Anthropic contextual retrieval ideas.
- Researcher (online): a Plan → Search → Reflect loop:
- *Planning*: reads the lightweight memory to decide what to search (memory guides direction, never provides answers).
- *Searching*: parallel embedding + BM25 + page-ID retrieval; results are unioned and temporally accumulated.
- *Reflection*: self-judges whether information suffices; if not, generates a focused follow-up request (max 3 rounds). Performance keeps improving from reflection depth 1→5.
- Objective: find the shortest context c that maximizes task performance. Memorizer and Researcher are each trained with REINFORCE-style policy gradients using answer-based rewards.
- LoCoMo (GPT-4o-mini): GAM leads all four categories, e.g., 57.75 single-hop F1, 59.45 temporal, 33.30 open-domain (vs MEM0's 28.64).
- HotpotQA (Qwen2.5-14B): GAM hits 64.07 F1 at 56K context (+12 over RAG) and stays robust at 448K (57.87), while MEM0 collapses to 26.55.
- RULER: GAM reaches 93.20% on multi-hop tracing where RAG scores 0.00% (single-shot retrieval can't do iterative reasoning).
- Tools: all three search tools > any pair > any single tool (53.18 vs 51.66/51.12 vs 48.64 max).
- Model scale: the Researcher needs far more capacity than the Memorizer (0.5B→14B: 9.08→53.18 F1); Memorizer saturates near 14B.
- Cost: GAM's online serving takes ~12.43s vs 0.15–0.55s for baselines, but its compact default context is only ~106 tokens; adding raw pages raises F1 to 55.71 at 22× token cost.
- 12–18s latency unsuitable for real-time chat; longer context isn't always better (224K can beat 448K); model-scale gains saturate; best quality requires costly token trade-offs.
- Paper: Yan B.Y., Li C., Qian H., Lu S., Liu Z. "General Agentic Memory Via Deep Research", arXiv:2511.18423v1, 2025.
- Institutions: BAAI, Renmin University of China, Peking University, Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
- Code: https://github.com/VectorSpaceLab/general-agentic-memory