analiza aiqbench
The paper introduces MemCut, a benchmark for testing whether LLM agents actually forget sensitive user information after a deletion request. Its main finding is that removing the disclosing messages is not enough: residual recovery stays at 39-76% when deletion is guided by an LLM, and secrets can be reconstructed from indirect evidence in other turns. For readers building or deploying agent memory, the practical point is that "delete the record" does not imply "the information is gone," and candidate coverage in retrieval appears to be the key bottleneck to fix.
MemCut: Every Secret Leaves a Trail in the Long-Term Memory of LLM Agents
arXiv:2610.21405v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-term memory has become a crucial component of large language model (LLM) agents, with most research focusing on retrieving relevant information accurately and efficiently. However, a dependable memory system must also forget sensitive user data upon request. To evaluate this capability, we introduce MemCut, a systematic benchmark for user-requested forgetting. Its 456 hand-designed secrets in long-horizon conversations have fully annotated evidence trails to test recovery after deletion, including from messages that never state the secrets directly. We propose two recovery metrics. Native recovery measures reader success through the system's retrieval, whereas residual recovery measures the same reader's success when directly given surviving objects traced to annotated disclosures or evidence. We establish three reference deletion baselines to test how far existing retrievers and write models support forgetting across five memory designs and four LLMs. Disclosure removal reduces native recovery far more than residual recovery. LLM-guided deletion of ten additional turns from twenty retrieval candidates leaves 39-76% residual recovery. Subset sweeps (144 facts, three systems, two models) show that widening the pool at a fixed budget reduces residual recovery more than deleting all original candidates. These sweeps identify candidate coverage as a bottleneck in the reference baselines.
Abstract:Long-term memory has become a crucial component of large language model (LLM) agents, with most research focusing on retrieving relevant information accurately and efficiently. However, a dependable memory system must also forget sensitive user data upon request. To evaluate this capability, we introduce MemCut, a systematic benchmark for user-requested forgetting. Its 456 hand-designed secrets in long-horizon conversations have fully annotated evidence trails to test recovery after deletion, including from messages that never state the secrets directly. We propose two recovery metrics. Native recovery measures reader success through the system's retrieval, whereas residual recovery measures the same reader's success when directly given surviving objects traced to annotated disclosures or evidence. We establish three reference deletion baselines to test how far existing retrievers and write models support forgetting across five memory designs and four LLMs. Disclosure removal reduces native recovery far more than residual recovery. LLM-guided deletion of ten additional turns from twenty retrieval candidates leaves 39-76% residual recovery. Subset sweeps (144 facts, three systems, two models) show that widening the pool at a fixed budget reduces residual recovery more than deleting all original candidates. These sweeps identify candidate coverage as a bottleneck in the reference baselines.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.21405 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.21405v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.21405 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 289 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Game Design Creativity evals
LessWrong · 12 oct. 2026

AgentOps: Operationalize agentic AI at scale with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore
AWS · 1 iun. 2026

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · 15 aug. 2026

Building a context-aware AI assistant on AgentCore and OpenClaw
AWS · 6 oct. 2026