Procedural Memory Under Change: Reuse and Interference in Controlled Web Tasks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.09774v1
• Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2026 06:22:42 GMT
• Title: Procedural Memory Under Change: Reuse and Interference in Controlled Web Tasks
• Abstract summary: Procedural memory lets language agents reuse successful routines, but reuse presumes that a stored routine remains applicable.<n>We study what happens when that presumption is deliberately violated.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Procedural memory lets language agents reuse successful routines, but reuse presumes that a stored routine remains applicable. We study what happens when that presumption is deliberately violated. The study combines a retrospective, human-assisted interface-adaptation case from BrowserGym TimeWarp with controlled frozen-memory comparisons on synthetic shopping decisions. During the documented WebShop V1-V6 development path, interface-specific code was adapted while the separately stored high-level procedure was not reported to change; this phase does not constitute an autonomous memory-agent evaluation. In the controlled phase, an early pilot produced one task on which two memory conditions selected a more expensive item while the no-memory condition selected the reference minimum. Follow-up probes did not establish a recurring row-order or identity-binding pattern. We then tested four forms of mismatch: changed quantities, a different evidence representation, a conflict between local and global optimization, and distributed promotion evidence, across 32 formal cells. Each cell used one temperature-0 generation with the same local qwen3:8b configuration and no adaptive retry. Across these pairs, none of the predefined diagnostic interference signatures appeared on the tasks for which they were defined when current-task evidence was explicit and sufficient. The result identifies a tested region of non-interference: a procedural memory can be mismatched without becoming behaviorally disruptive. It does not establish general safety or a mechanism. The remaining question is which additional conditions turn applicability mismatch into observable, memory-caused error.

Related papers

• MemSecBench: Tracking Agent Memory Poisoning from Persistence to Consequence and Repair [11.307480451677145]
  Memory systems allow agents to retain and reuse information from past interactions, but they can also let malicious content persist.<n>Recent benchmarks increasingly examine agent memory security, yet few trace the same malicious semantics across persistence, downstream consequences, and selective repair.<n>MemSecBench is a benchmark for the lifecycle security of agent memory systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T16:06:54Z)
• MemOps: Benchmarking Lifecycle Memory Operations in Long-Horizon Conversations [50.24315431387575]
  We introduce MemOps, a benchmark that reformulates conversational memory as a sequence of lifecycle operations.<n>MemOps represents each memory event with a structured trace specifying its trigger, target, scope, state transition, and supporting evidence.<n>Across long-context, retrieval-based, parametric and managed-memory systems, MemOps disentangles failure modes that final-answer accuracy alone conceals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-14T15:33:44Z)
• MemTrace: Probing What Final Accuracy Misses in Long-Term Memory [39.696350769003104]
  We introduce MemTrace, a benchmark whose unit of measurement is the knowledge point.<n>MemTrace probes each fact along three controlled dimensions.<n>We find that similar pooled accuracy hides different failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T22:21:23Z)
• WorldMemArena: Evaluating Multimodal Agent Memory Through Action-World Interaction [72.1620416874118]
  Multimodal large language models are increasingly deployed as long-horizon agents.<n>Existing benchmarks measure recall over static dialogue, collapse memory into a single end-of-task accuracy, and reduce visual observations to captions.<n>We formulate multimodal agent memory as an Action-World Interaction Loop with an observable four-stage lifecycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T04:27:20Z)
• MemGuard: Preventing Memory Contamination in Long-Term Memory-Augmented Large Language Models [56.31411457917676]
  We introduce MemGuard, a type-aware memory framework that preserves functional memory boundaries during memory construction and retrieval.<n>Across hallucination and long-horizon conversation benchmarks, MemGuard improves memory reliability by up to 28.27% while retrieving up to 5.8x fewer memory tokens than prior methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-27T06:04:19Z)
• Remembering More, Risking More: Longitudinal Safety Risks in Memory-Equipped LLM Agents [18.83666486835137]
  In deployment, a single agent serves many independent tasks over a long horizon, and memory accumulated during earlier tasks can affect behavior on later, unrelated ones.<n>We introduce a trigger-probe protocol that evaluates a fixed probe set against read-only memory snapshots at varying prefix lengths.<n>We apply this protocol across three deployment scenarios spanning records, memos, forms, and email correspondence and eight memory architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T04:06:34Z)
• PREPING: Building Agent Memory without Tasks [65.75870568959644]
  Preping is a proposer-guided memory construction framework.<n>At its core is proposer memory, a structured control state that shapes future practice.<n>Trials show Preping substantially improves over a no-memory baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T04:34:43Z)
• When Stored Evidence Stops Being Usable: Scale-Conditioned Evaluation of Agent Memory [4.425240080125479]
  We present a scale-conditioned evaluation protocol for agent memory under evidence-preserving growth.<n>For each query, task evidence is held fixed while irrelevant sessions are added.<n>The protocol logs agent--memory trajectories and reports four diagnostics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T06:22:31Z)
• MemEvoBench: Benchmarking Memory MisEvolution in LLM Agents [78.95081012334116]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) with persistent memory enhances interaction continuity and personalization but introduces new safety risks.<n> contaminated or biased memory accumulation can trigger abnormal agent behaviors.<n>MemeEvoBench is the first benchmark evaluating memory safety in LLM agents against adversarial memory injection, noisy tool outputs, and biased feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-17T07:29:52Z)
• MemoryArena: Benchmarking Agent Memory in Interdependent Multi-Session Agentic Tasks [55.145729491377374]
  Existing evaluations of agents with memory typically assess memorization and action in isolation.<n>We introduce MemoryArena, a unified evaluation gym for benchmarking agent memory in multi-session Memory-Agent-Environment loops.<n> MemoryArena supports evaluation across web navigation, preference-constrained planning, progressive information search, and sequential formal reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T09:49:14Z)

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.