analiza aiqbench
This paper is primarily about AI: it introduces GroupAssistBench, a benchmark for memory-driven assistance in real group chats handled by an AI assistant. The main finding is that a strong memory system nearly matches full-context models on recall but lags well behind on actually using remembered information, especially when facts are spread across members or conflict. For AI readers, the practical takeaway is that recall scores alone overstate how useful an agent's memory is in multi-user settings.
One Assistant, Many Memories: Benchmarking Real-World Group Assistance When Recall Is Not Enough
arXiv:2611.04867v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The value of memory lies not only in recall but in using it to provide appropriate assistance. Recent benchmarks test memory use in personalisation and agentic tasks, but seldom evaluate assistance without fixed answers or integration across multiple participants. Group chats make both challenges more acute: an assistant must integrate information from multiple members, track revisions and conflicts over time, and produce one response for the group. Yet existing group memory benchmarks rely on synthetic conversations and inherit constrained evaluation from general memory benchmarks, focusing on recall against fixed answers or decisions over a closed set. We introduce GroupAssistBench, the first memory benchmark from real-world group conversations with a deployed group assistant, covering 80,299 messages in 50 groups and costing over $53K. Over the same histories, GroupAssistBench evaluates memory recall (L1) with reference answers and memory use (L2) with service requests without fixed answers across single, distributed, and conflicting memories (M1--M3). Requests are verified to require group history, memories are anchored to their sources, and L2 uses tailored rubrics with penalties derived from real user feedback. Across evaluations of frontier models with full context, retrieval methods, and memory systems, the strongest memory system rivals full context on recall but falls far behind on use, especially for distributed and conflicting memories. Together, two additions that relate retrieved memories and bind remembered facts as response constraints bring consistent gains, showing that group memory systems must improve use, not recall alone.
Abstract:The value of memory lies not only in recall but in using it to provide appropriate assistance. Recent benchmarks test memory use in personalisation and agentic tasks, but seldom evaluate assistance without fixed answers or integration across multiple participants. Group chats make both challenges more acute: an assistant must integrate information from multiple members, track revisions and conflicts over time, and produce one response for the group. Yet existing group memory benchmarks rely on synthetic conversations and inherit constrained evaluation from general memory benchmarks, focusing on recall against fixed answers or decisions over a closed set. We introduce GroupAssistBench, the first memory benchmark from real-world group conversations with a deployed group assistant, covering 80,299 messages in 50 groups and costing over $53K. Over the same histories, GroupAssistBench evaluates memory recall (L1) with reference answers and memory use (L2) with service requests without fixed answers across single, distributed, and conflicting memories (M1--M3). Requests are verified to require group history, memories are anchored to their sources, and L2 uses tailored rubrics with penalties derived from real user feedback. Across evaluations of frontier models with full context, retrieval methods, and memory systems, the strongest memory system rivals full context on recall but falls far behind on use, especially for distributed and conflicting memories. Together, two additions that relate retrieved memories and bind remembered facts as response constraints bring consistent gains, showing that group memory systems must improve use, not recall alone.
Project address: this https URL. Code address: this https URL
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2611.04867 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2611.04867v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.04867 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 · 346 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
VAMPS: Visual-Assisted Mathematical Problem Solving Benchmark
arXiv · 5 iun. 2026
Assistax: A Multi-Agent Hardware-Accelerated Reinforcement Learning Benchmark for Assistive Robotics
arXiv · 3 iun. 2026
Assistant Placement Aria: A Benchmark for Egocentric Placement Assistance
arXiv · 4 aug. 2026
Beyond Final Decisions: A Process-Centric Benchmark for Transparent AI-Assisted Peer Review
arXiv · 9 sept. 2026