Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2601.21545

ShardMemo: Scope-Before-Routing for Agentic Memory Retrieval

Abstract

Agentic systems accumulate persistent memory across sessions, tools, and tasks, and a later request must retrieve from it under two distinct constraints: which memories it is permitted to access, and which are relevant under a limited search budget. Existing memory systems handle access scope in two flawed ways: applying scope after retrieval wastes probe budget on inadmissible memories, while treating scope as a learned ranking feature makes a hard constraint depend on router quality. We present SHARD-MEMO, an agentic memory system built on scope-before-routing: metadata predicates first identify the admissible shards, and a learned router then selects a small number of them for shard-local approximate nearest neighbor retrieval. Given the supplied scope predicate and metadata, this separates hard admissibility from learned relevance ranking, so inadmissible shards cannot consume shard-probe budget. We evaluate on LoCoMo, HotpotQA, and ToolBench, covering conversational, long-context, and procedural memory. Under matched supervision and fixed budgets, SHARDMEMO improves over a learned router baseline by roughly +3 F1 on LoCoMo; in end-to-end LoCoMo evaluation it improves over the strongest evaluated memory baseline by up to +6.8 F1, with gains on HotpotQA and ToolBench.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yang Zhao, Chengxiao Dai, Mengying Kou, Yue Xiu, Dusit Niyato. 2026-08-31. ShardMemo: Scope-Before-Routing for Agentic Memory Retrieval. https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.21545

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

CyrillicQA: The Influence of Phonetically Encoded Secret Language on LLM Performance

Due to the selection of their training data, large language models (LLMs) perform best on standard-language inputs from languages using the Latin alphabet with large speaker populations, while disadvantaging other language varieties. Nevertheless, they can also be a versatile tool for preserving precisely such endangered languages. But do they also possess the necessary creativity and capacity for abstraction to decode phonetically encoded language the same way humans do?

cs.CL

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

AI Alignment through a Game-theoretic Lens: A Survey

As large language models and increasingly capable AI agents are deployed in high-risk settings, aligning them with complex human values has become a central challenge. Existing alignment methods, while effective in improving helpfulness, harmlessness, and controllability, often struggle to capture real-world preferences that are context-dependent, non-transitive, and shaped by dynamic multi-party interactions. This survey reviews AI alignment through a game-theoretic lens. Specifically, it organizes recent progress around key game-theoretic elements and synthesizes the literature along three challenges: preference diversity, alignment priority, and temporal dynamics. This perspective clarifies where current alignment methods genuinely benefit from game-theoretic analysis, where the framework is looser, and what challenges remain in building robust, adaptive, and verifiable AI systems.

cs.AI