Skip to content
← Back to explorer

MemoryArena: Benchmarking Agent Memory in Interdependent Multi-Session Agentic Tasks

Zexue He, Yu Wang, Churan Zhi, Yuanzhe Hu, Tzu-Ping Chen, Lang Yin, Ze Chen, Tong Arthur Wu, Siru Ouyang, Zihan Wang, Jiaxin Pei, Julian McAuley, Yejin Choi, Alex Pentland · Feb 18, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

High trust

Use this as a practical starting point for protocol research, then validate against the original paper.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

High

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Existing evaluations of agents with memory typically assess memorization and action in isolation. One class of benchmarks evaluates memorization by testing recall of past conversations or text but fails to capture how memory is used to guide future decisions. Another class focuses on agents acting in single-session tasks without the need for long-term memory. However, in realistic settings, memorization and action are tightly coupled: agents acquire memory while interacting with the environment, and subsequently rely on that memory to solve future tasks. To capture this setting, we introduce MemoryArena, a unified evaluation gym for benchmarking agent memory in multi-session Memory-Agent-Environment loops. The benchmark consists of human-crafted agentic tasks with explicitly interdependent subtasks, where agents must learn from earlier actions and feedback by distilling experiences into memory, and subsequently use that memory to guide later actions to solve the overall task. MemoryArena supports evaluation across web navigation, preference-constrained planning, progressive information search, and sequential formal reasoning, and reveals that agents with near-saturated performance on existing long-context memory benchmarks like LoCoMo perform poorly in our agentic setting, exposing a gap in current evaluations for agents with memory.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper has useful evaluation signal, but protocol completeness is partial; pair it with related papers before deciding implementation strategy.

Best use

Secondary protocol comparison source

Use if you need

A benchmark-and-metrics comparison anchor.

Main weakness

No major weakness surfaced.

Trust level

High

Usefulness score

65/100 • Medium

Useful as a secondary reference; validate protocol details against neighboring papers.

Human Feedback Signal

Detected

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Moderate-confidence candidate

Extraction confidence: High

What We Could Verify

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.

Human Feedback Types

strong

Pairwise Preference

Directly usable for protocol triage.

Evaluation Modes

strong

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

Benchmarks / Datasets

strong

Memoryarena

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

Reported Metrics

strong

Recall

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

Rater Population

missing

Unknown

Rater source not explicitly reported.

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: Yes
  • Feedback types: Pairwise Preference
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: General

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: Web Browsing
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: High
  • Use this page as: Secondary protocol comparison source

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

Memoryarena

Reported Metrics

recall

Research Brief

Deterministic synthesis

Existing evaluations of agents with memory typically assess memorization and action in isolation. HFEPX signals include Pairwise Preference, Automatic Metrics, Web Browsing with confidence 0.80. Updated from current HFEPX corpus.

Generated Apr 13, 2026, 6:31 AM · Grounded in abstract + metadata only

Key Takeaways

  • Existing evaluations of agents with memory typically assess memorization and action in isolation.
  • One class of benchmarks evaluates memorization by testing recall of past conversations or text but fails to capture how memory is used to guide future decisions.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare its human-feedback setup against pairwise and rubric hubs.
  • Cross-check benchmark overlap: Memoryarena.
  • Validate metric comparability (recall).

Caveats

  • Generated from title, abstract, and extracted metadata only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
  • Extraction confidence is probabilistic and should be validated for critical decisions.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Existing evaluations of agents with memory typically assess memorization and action in isolation.
  • One class of benchmarks evaluates memorization by testing recall of past conversations or text but fails to capture how memory is used to guide future decisions.
  • To capture this setting, we introduce MemoryArena, a unified evaluation gym for benchmarking agent memory in multi-session Memory-Agent-Environment loops.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • Existing evaluations of agents with memory typically assess memorization and action in isolation.
  • To capture this setting, we introduce MemoryArena, a unified evaluation gym for benchmarking agent memory in multi-session Memory-Agent-Environment loops.

Researcher Checklist

  • Pass: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Pairwise Preference

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Pass: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    Detected: Memoryarena

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: recall

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.