Human Feedback Types
missingNone explicit
No explicit feedback protocol extracted.
"Persistent AI assistants, such as OpenClaw, accumulate large collections of related memories over long-term interactions."
HFEPX · Eval paper review
Wenxuan Wang, Haoyu Sun, Fukuan Hou, Mingyang Song +3 more
Published
Jun 4, 2026
Citations
0
Trust level
Low
Usefulness score
25/100 (Low)
Extraction confidence
45% (Low)
Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.
Rater population
Not reported
Signals refreshed
Oct 5, 2026
This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.
Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.
Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.
Best use
Background context only
Use if you need
A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.
What to verify
Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.
Main weakness
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.
If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here
Persistent AI assistants, such as OpenClaw, accumulate large collections of related memories over long-term interactions. As these memories grow, they may reinforce one another, diverge across contexts, or directly conflict, making correct assistance depend on memory relations rather than isolated recall. Existing long-term memory benchmarks do not systematically probe how agents preserve and utilize such relations during downstream tasks. To address this gap, we introduce SubtleMemory, a benchmark for fine-grained relational memory discrimination in long-running AI agents. SubtleMemory constructs relation-controlled latent semantic artifacts whose variants instantiate complementary, nuanced, or contradictory relations, and embeds them into realistic user-agent histories, requiring agents to recover distributed relational structures during later queries and instructions. The benchmark contains 1,522 evaluation instances over 10 long histories, grounded in 1,090 relation-controlled memory-variant sets and spanning user-related and non-user-related queries. Evaluating six standalone memory systems, two Claw-style agents with native memory modules, and three Claw-style agents with plugin memory modules, we find that current systems remain weak on fine-grained relational memory discrimination. We further introduce diagnostic protocols that reveal distinct capability profiles across memory preservation, retrieval, and downstream reasoning stages.
These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.
None explicit
No explicit feedback protocol extracted.
"Persistent AI assistants, such as OpenClaw, accumulate large collections of related memories over long-term interactions."
Automatic Metrics
Includes extracted eval setup.
"Persistent AI assistants, such as OpenClaw, accumulate large collections of related memories over long-term interactions."
Not reported
No explicit QC controls found.
"Persistent AI assistants, such as OpenClaw, accumulate large collections of related memories over long-term interactions."
Not extracted
No benchmark anchors detected.
"Persistent AI assistants, such as OpenClaw, accumulate large collections of related memories over long-term interactions."
Recall
Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.
"As these memories grow, they may reinforce one another, diverge across contexts, or directly conflict, making correct assistance depend on memory relations rather than isolated recall."
No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.
Persistent AI assistants, such as OpenClaw, accumulate large collections of related memories over long-term interactions.
Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.
Human feedback protocol is explicit
No explicit human feedback protocol detected.
Evaluation mode is explicit
Detected: Automatic Metrics
Quality control reporting appears
No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.
Benchmark or dataset anchors are present
No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.
Metric reporting is present
Detected: recall