Rashomon Memory: Towards Argumentation-Driven Retrieval for Multi-Perspective Agent Memory

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03588v1
• Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2026 04:29:50 GMT
• Title: Rashomon Memory: Towards Argumentation-Driven Retrieval for Multi-Perspective Agent Memory
• Abstract summary: Rashomon Memory is an architecture where parallel goal-conditioned agents encode experiences according to their priorities and negotiate at query time through argumentation.<n>We show that retrieval modes emerge from attack graph topology, and that the conflict surfacing mode, where the system reports genuine disagreement rather than forcing resolution, lets decision-makers see the underlying interpretive conflict directly.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: AI agents operating over extended time horizons accumulate experiences that serve multiple concurrent goals, and must often maintain conflicting interpretations of the same events. A concession during a client negotiation encodes as a ``trust-building investment'' for one strategic goal and a ``contractual liability'' for another. Current memory architectures assume a single correct encoding, or at best support multiple views over unified storage. We propose Rashomon Memory: an architecture where parallel goal-conditioned agents encode experiences according to their priorities and negotiate at query time through argumentation. Each perspective maintains its own ontology and knowledge graph. At retrieval, perspectives propose interpretations, critique each other's proposals using asymmetric domain knowledge, and Dung's argumentation semantics determines which proposals survive. The resulting attack graph is itself an explanation: it records which interpretation was selected, which alternatives were considered, and on what grounds they were rejected. We present a proof-of-concept showing that retrieval modes (selection, composition, conflict surfacing) emerge from attack graph topology, and that the conflict surfacing mode, where the system reports genuine disagreement rather than forcing resolution, lets decision-makers see the underlying interpretive conflict directly.

Related papers

• Navigating Sparse Evidence: Agentic Visual RAG via Explicit Context Selection and Consolidation [50.92223196290564]
  We propose a unified agent loop for explicit evidence selection and consolidation.<n>During exploration, SCoRE retains only query-relevant observations and their source pointers in a maintained textual ledger.<n>At termination, it reloads the referenced original images and consolidates the visual evidence for answering, arranging it into a logical sequence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-14T16:11:35Z)
• When Personal Memory Has No Single Answer: Evaluating LLM Agents under Irreducible Conflict [36.17544860911908]
  We introduce underlineTesting underlineAgents' underlineNavigation of underlineGenuine, underlineLatent, and underlineEntangled Memory Conflicts (textscTANGLE)<n>It comprises 541 instances across 40 personas and three types: Context-Partitioned Conflict (CPC), Behavior-Oscillation Conflict (BOC), and Source-Contradiction Conflict ( SCC)<n>We evaluate two tracks---an oracle track with curated memory
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-14T03:48:08Z)
• ARGUS: Theory-of-Mind Guided Argument Generation with Strategy-Aware Planning and Knowledge Grounding [5.0921317897723215]
  We propose Argus, an agent-based framework that operationalizes classical rhetoric for persuasive writing.<n>At its core, a Theory-of-Mind (ToM) Reasoner constructs an explicit dual mental model of the audience's beliefs and values to guide downstream decisions.<n>We evaluate Argus across three diverse benchmarks using both automated pairwise Elo and LLM-as-judge metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-06T02:26:10Z)
• StateFuse: Deterministic Conflict-Preserving Memory for Multi-Agent Systems [6.160059055899747]
  StateFuse is a conflict-aware replicated memory contract built on standard OpSet/CRDT merge.<n>We evaluate StateFuse against flat multi-value, raw-log, provenance-style, and collapsed baselines under matched resolver and verification policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-07T05:06:33Z)
• Mitigating Context-Memory Conflicts in LLMs through Dynamic Cognitive Reconciliation Decoding [51.242997961841276]
  Large language models accumulate parametric knowledge through pre-training.<n> knowledge conflicts occur when outdated or incorrect parametric knowledge conflicts with external knowledge in the context.<n>Existing methods address knowledge conflicts through contrastive decoding, but in conflict-free scenarios, static approaches disrupt output distribution.<n>We propose Dynamic Cognitive Reconciliation Decoding (DCRD), to predict and context-memory conflicts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T14:29:45Z)
• Change My View? The Dynamics of Persuasion and Polarization in Online Discourse [6.390103958990699]
  We use large language models to analyze a corpus of debates on Reddit's r/ChangeMyView.<n>We find that effective public reasoning depends as much on relational framing as on evidential content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T18:40:51Z)
• AdaMem: Adaptive User-Centric Memory for Long-Horizon Dialogue Agents [49.63422082885992]
  We propose AdaMem, an adaptive user-centric memory framework for long-horizon dialogue agents.<n>AdaMem organizes dialogue history into working, episodic, persona, and graph memories.<n>We evaluate AdaMem on the LoCoMo and PERSONAMEM benchmarks for long-horizon reasoning and user modeling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-17T13:22:54Z)
• Memory for Autonomous LLM Agents:Mechanisms, Evaluation, and Emerging Frontiers [0.42061757959666934]
  Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly operate in settings where a single context window is too small to capture what has happened.<n>Memory is what turns a stateless text generator into a genuinely adaptive agent.<n>This survey offers a structured account of how memory is designed, implemented, and evaluated in modern LLM-based agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-08T15:08:01Z)
• LaSER: Internalizing Explicit Reasoning into Latent Space for Dense Retrieval [74.72139580745511]
  LaSER is a novel self-distillation framework that internalizes explicit reasoning into the latent space of retrievers.<n>Our method successfully combines the reasoning depth of explicit CoT pipelines with the inference efficiency of standard dense retrievers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T04:11:18Z)
• Diagnosing Knowledge Conflict in Multimodal Long-Chain Reasoning [78.86309644343295]
  Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in long chain-of-thought reasoning often fail when different knowledge sources provide conflicting signals.<n>We formalize these failures under a unified notion of knowledge conflict, distinguishing input-level objective conflict from process-level effective conflict.<n>Our findings provide a mechanism-level view of multimodal reasoning under knowledge conflict and enable principled diagnosis and control of long-CoT failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-16T07:10:44Z)
• ARGORA: Orchestrated Argumentation for Causally Grounded LLM Reasoning and Decision Making [11.531465685641086]
  We introduce ARGORA, a framework that organizes multi-expert discussions into explicit argumentation graphs.<n>ARGORA can remove individual arguments and recompute outcomes, identifying which reasoning chains were necessary.<n>We further introduce a correction mechanism that aligns internal reasoning with external judgments when they disagree.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T10:48:04Z)
• Analyzing Reasoning Consistency in Large Multimodal Models under Cross-Modal Conflicts [74.47786985522762]
  We identify a critical failure mode termed textual inertia, where models tend to blindly adhere to the erroneous text while neglecting conflicting visual evidence.<n>We propose the LogicGraph Perturbation Protocol that structurally injects perturbations into the reasoning chains of diverse LMMs.<n>Results reveal that models successfully self-correct in less than 10% of cases and predominantly succumb to blind textual error propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-07T16:39:34Z)
• That's Deprecated! Understanding, Detecting, and Steering Knowledge Conflicts in Language Models for Code Generation [55.78914774437411]
  Large language models (LLMs) behave when faced with discrepancies between their parametric knowledge and conflicting information contained in a prompt.<n>We propose a domain-agnostic framework for constructing and interpreting such conflicts.<n>We show that activation-level steering can achieve up to a textbf12.6% improvement in steering success over a random baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T22:27:56Z)
• Unraveling Cross-Modality Knowledge Conflicts in Large Vision-Language Models [33.76903352835436]
  Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities for capturing and reasoning over multimodal inputs. These models are prone to parametric knowledge conflicts, which arise from inconsistencies of represented knowledge between their vision and language components. We present a systematic approach to detect, interpret, and mitigate them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T17:59:28Z)
• Towards CausalGPT: A Multi-Agent Approach for Faithful Knowledge Reasoning via Promoting Causal Consistency in LLMs [55.66353783572259]
  Causal-Consistency Chain-of-Thought harnesses multi-agent collaboration to bolster the faithfulness and causality of foundation models.<n>Our framework demonstrates significant superiority over state-of-the-art methods through extensive and comprehensive evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-23T04:59:21Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.