97.1AIJun 3
Scaling Self-Evolving Agents via Parametric MemoryTao Ren, Weiyao Luo, Hui Yang et al.
Existing memory-augmented LLM agents store past experience exclusively in prompt space, as textual summaries or retrieved passages, while keeping model parameters frozen throughout a rollout. Such agents can \emph{look up} what they have seen but cannot \emph{learn from} it: their policy is unchanged by experience, and any information dropped from the context is permanently lost. We introduce \texttt{TMEM}, a self-evolving parametric memory framework in which the agent not only compresses history into explicit memory but also absorbs distilled supervision into fast LoRA weights $Δ_t$ via lightweight online updates, genuinely altering its future behavior within a single episode. We formalize this as an agentic decision process with fast-weight rollout dynamics: actions are sampled from $π_{θ_0+Δ_t}$, while extraction actions produce supervision that updates $Δ_t$ for subsequent decisions. This view makes the extraction policy directly optimizable by RL: training $θ_0$ improves not only task actions but also the quality of the data used for online LoRA adaptation. We further propose SVD-based initialization of the LoRA subspace to accelerate online convergence. Experiments on LoCoMo, LongMemEval-S, multi-objective search, and CL-Bench show that \texttt{TMEM} consistently outperforms summary-based and retrieval-based baselines across different model scales.
CLFeb 20, 2025
Mitigating Lost-in-Retrieval Problems in Retrieval Augmented Multi-Hop Question AnsweringRongzhi Zhu, Xiangyu Liu, Zequn Sun et al.
In this paper, we identify a critical problem, "lost-in-retrieval", in retrieval-augmented multi-hop question answering (QA): the key entities are missed in LLMs' sub-question decomposition. "Lost-in-retrieval" significantly degrades the retrieval performance, which disrupts the reasoning chain and leads to the incorrect answers. To resolve this problem, we propose a progressive retrieval and rewriting method, namely ChainRAG, which sequentially handles each sub-question by completing missing key entities and retrieving relevant sentences from a sentence graph for answer generation. Each step in our retrieval and rewriting process builds upon the previous one, creating a seamless chain that leads to accurate retrieval and answers. Finally, all retrieved sentences and sub-question answers are integrated to generate a comprehensive answer to the original question. We evaluate ChainRAG on three multi-hop QA datasets - MuSiQue, 2Wiki, and HotpotQA - using three large language models: GPT4o-mini, Qwen2.5-72B, and GLM-4-Plus. Empirical results demonstrate that ChainRAG consistently outperforms baselines in both effectiveness and efficiency.
AIMay 21, 2025
When Can Large Reasoning Models Save Thinking? Mechanistic Analysis of Behavioral Divergence in ReasoningRongzhi Zhu, Yi Liu, Zequn Sun et al.
Large reasoning models (LRMs) have significantly advanced performance on complex tasks, yet their tendency to overthink introduces inefficiencies. This study investigates the internal mechanisms of reinforcement learning (RL)-trained LRMs when prompted to save thinking, revealing three distinct thinking modes: no thinking (NT), explicit thinking (ET), and implicit thinking (IT). Through comprehensive analysis of confidence in thinking termination, attention from thinking to generation, and attentional focus on input sections, we uncover key factors influencing the reasoning behaviors. We further find that NT reduces output length at the cost of accuracy, while ET and IT maintain accuracy with reduced response length. Our findings expose fundamental inconsistencies in RL-optimized LRMs, necessitating adaptive improvements for reliable efficiency.