Layered Memory Model

• Layered Memory Model is a framework that partitions memory into discrete layers to balance speed, capacity, and energy efficiency.
• It incorporates hardware, neural, and application-level strategies, including dynamic promotion, prefetching, and sparse retrieval.
• The model underpins improved scalability and controlled memory operations in advanced computing, AI, and concurrent systems.

A layered memory model is a systematic framework in which memory is organized, managed, and accessed across multiple strata, each optimized for different performance, capacity, persistence, or abstraction requirements. Layered memory models appear across disciplines spanning systems architecture, neuroscience-inspired computation, LLMs, and application-level data management. The unifying principle is that memory is neither monolithic nor statically arranged but can be strategically partitioned into complementary functional “layers” or hierarchies—each with distinct mechanisms for storage, access, and update. This article synthesizes primary research threads that define, implement, and evaluate layered memory systems, with a focus on computational and artificial intelligence domains.

1. Layered Memory Architectures: Principles and System Design

Layered memory architectures leverage the predictable trade-offs between speed, capacity, bandwidth, and volatility by partitioning memory into multiple discrete segments (layers or levels), e.g., on-chip SRAM, off-chip DRAM, and nonvolatile storage (0710.4656). Higher layers are characterized by faster access and lower energy per operation but markedly limited capacity. Lower layers trade higher access latency for large storage volumes.

The discipline of hierarchical memory allocation and management is formalized by techniques such as Memory Allocation and Layer Assignment (MHLA) augmented by Time Extensions (TE) for prefetching (0710.4656). In this approach, objects or sub-arrays with limited active lifetimes and/or high reuse potential are dynamically promoted to faster memory layers, while infrequently accessed or bulk data remain in lower, energy-efficient strata. Prefetching leverages transfer engines (DMA/data movers) to overlap data movement with computation, formally bounded by memory constraints such as:

$$\text{Lifetime}_{\text{extended}} = \text{Lifetime}_{\text{original}} + \Delta \text{Lifetime} \leq M_{\text{on-chip}}$$

This ensures that any extension of the in-memory active period due to speculative prefetching does not violate the physical bounds of fast memory.

On the hardware side, 3D-stacked DRAM exploits physical layering to aggregate bandwidth from multiple active memory tiers using Simultaneous Multi Layer Access (SMLA) (Lee et al., 2015). The SMLA approach combines both Dedicated-IO (static TSV partitioning and per-layer frequency scaling) and Cascaded-IO (time-multiplexed, pipelined transfer) to linearly scale bandwidth with the number of stacked layers, subject to energy and circuit design constraints.

2. Biological and Neural Inspirations: Hierarchical and Layered Memory Systems

Hierarchical memory models in computational neuroscience posit memory layers corresponding to empirical structures found in cortex and other biological substrates. Two principal organizational motifs are observed:

• Hierarchical Parts-Based Representation (0905.2125): Visual cortex-inspired models deploy at least two explicit layers. The lower “bunch” columns specialize in localized feature extraction (e.g., Gabor-filtered patches for facial landmarks), while higher “identity” columns aggregate and bind these parts, creating robust, sparsely coded representations for tasks such as facial recognition. Fast winner-take-all (WTA) selection interacts with slower bidirectional synaptic plasticity and homeostatic regulation to drive experience-dependent formation of lasting memory patterns:

$$\tau \frac{dw}{dt} = \varepsilon\, p^{(\text{pre})}\, p^{(\text{post})} \mathcal{H}(\chi - A(t))\, \mathcal{H}(p^{(\text{post})} - \theta_0^{-})\, \mathcal{H}_{-}^{+}\bigl(p^{(\text{post})} - \theta_{-}^{+}\bigr)$$

• Hierarchical Associative Memory (HAM) (Krotov, 2021): This class generalizes Hopfield networks into arbitrarily deep, fully recurrent layered structures, each with trainable activation and feedback dynamics. Memories are not atomic attractors but are recursively assembled via inter-layer communication and convergence to a structured energy function:

$$E = \sum_{A=1}^{N_\text{layer}}\left[\sum_{i=1}^{N_A}(x^A_ig^A_i) - L^A\right] - \sum_{A=1}^{N_\text{layer}-1} \sum_{i,j}g^{(A+1)}_i\,\xi^{(A+1,A)}_{ij}g^A_j$$

This layered dynamic, with bottom-up and top-down message passing, mimics cortical feedback and supports robust pattern completion and compositional memory.

3. Layered Memory in Modern LLMs

Layered memory models in LLMs operate at several abstraction levels:

• Memory as a Persistent State and Operational Layers (Zhang et al., 23 Sep 2025): Memory within LLMs is classified into four operational strata:
  1. Parametric memory—statistically entrenched in model weights during (pre)training.
  2. Contextual memory—activations or cache resident in a session’s transient inference state.
  3. External/non-parametric memory—retrieval-augmented document stores, knowledge bases, or user logs.
  4. Procedural/episodic memory—timeline- or event-replay records across sessions.

Each layer is characterized by its location (parameters, activations, external indices, logs), persistence (ranging from permanent to ephemeral), write/access path, and controllability (ease of update/edit/forget).

• Memory Layers and Sparse Lookup Modules (Berges et al., 12 Dec 2024): Memory layers, when integrated directly into transformer architectures, use trainable key–value stores with sparse top-k activation. They complement compute-heavy, dense feedforward modules and provide scalable capacity for factual or associative storage and recall:

$$I = \text{SelectTopk}(Kq);\quad s = \text{Softmax}(K_Iq);\quad y = sV_I$$

Fully parallelizable instantiations (with product-key mechanisms) scale to 128B+ parameters with minimal computational overhead, enabling performance on factual QA tasks that matches or exceeds dense or MOE models.

• Latent State Layered Reweaving (Dillon et al., 4 Feb 2025): Instead of introducing external memory modules, certain frameworks capture and “reweave” latent states across transformer layers. For each token and processing layer, relevant representations are retained and hierarchically merged at later stages, mitigating the “context fading” that limits long-sequence generation:

$R(h_i, h_{i+1}) = \alpha h_i + (1-\alpha)h_{i+1}$

This reconstructive approach increases token recall (especially for rare tokens and numerical reasoning) while negligible impact on inference time demonstrates practical scalability.

4. Memory Models in Concurrency and Systems

Memory consistency and concurrency models are also layered, spanning language abstractions and hardware:

• Language–Hardware Memory Model Layering (Pöter et al., 2018): C++11’s memory model is layered atop underlying hardware memory consistency guarantees (e.g., SC, x86-TSO, ARM/POWER). C++11 introduces atomic operations with precise ordering guarantees (e.g., memory_order_seq_cst, acquire–release semantics) that map onto available hardware primitives and compiler reordering constraints. This permits sound composition of high-level concurrent programs while maximizing performance through selective relaxation of operation order.

The correctness of happens-before relationships is central:

$$\text{If } A \xrightarrow{\text{release}} B \text{ and } B \xrightarrow{\text{acquire}} C, \text{ then } A \rightarrow C$$

• Two-Phase (Infinite/Finite) Memory Modeling (Beck et al., 24 Apr 2024): Low-level memory semantics for program transformation verification are layered into “infinite” and “finite” models, the former using unbounded integers for addresses (permitting side-effect-free reasoning and optimizations such as dead-alloca elimination), and the latter enforcing real-world resource constraints (finite address spaces, OOM behavior). Formal refinement relations ensure that soundness established in idealized, infinite semantics is preserved (modulo OOM) for bounded, hardware-realistic executions.

5. Layered Memory in Application Domains

• Caching Layered Data Objects (Bari et al., 1 Apr 2025): Application-level data (e.g., videos, maps, neural network weights) can be partitioned into hierarchical layers (base + enhancement layers) to provide quality–resource trade-offs. Caching policies are adapted, with Layered LRU (LLRU) evicting least-recently used layers while ensuring that higher layers are present only if all subordinate layers are also cached. Analytical models quantify hit rates, showing that performance depends non-monotonically on number and popularity of layers, and that overhead from storing layers can offset potential benefits if not managed judiciously.
• Parallel Decoding via Row-Layered Memory Access (Cai et al., 17 Jul 2024): In error-correcting code decoding (e.g., McEliece MDPC codes), memory-intensive message-passing algorithms are made more efficient by partitioning algorithm state and parity-check matrices into layers. Row-layered scheduling permits immediate, layer-wise update of beliefs, reducing memory overhead and permitting high-throughput, parallel processing while maintaining performance.

6. Memory: Continual Learning, Control, and Governance

Recent proposals stress that AI systems require persistent, explicit, and governable memory operating systems (“MemOS,” “MemCubes”) for continual learning, personalization, and robust knowledge evolution (Li et al., 4 Jul 2025). By treating memory as a managed computational resource—explicitly scheduled, versioned, migrated, and composed—layered memory models enable cost-efficient storage, retrieval, updating, and controlled forgetting, far beyond the simple context windows or static parameter settings of baseline LLMs. In these systems, integration of parameter memory, activations, and external document or knowledge stores—coordinated via unified protocols—provides the operational basis for lifelong learning and system transparency.

7. Evaluation, Metrics, and Future Directions

Rigorous layered evaluation frameworks have been proposed (Zhang et al., 23 Sep 2025), which disentangle parametric, contextual, external, and episodic/procedural memory contributions via specialized metrics (e.g., closed-book recall, edit differentials, evidence attribution F1, timeline replay correctness) and testable protocols (parametric-only, offline retrieval, online retrieval). Through these, the field moves toward reproducible, governance-ready AI systems with auditable memory operations, targeted updating, and verifiable forgetting.

Testable research propositions include conditions for localizing knowledge within network substrates, construction of minimal evaluation cards, causally constrained model editing/unlearning, and identifying boundaries where retrieval augmentation outperforms long-context direct processing.

---

The layered memory model, in its diverse instantiations, thus underpins a broad array of techniques for efficient, robust, and controllable information retention—spanning hardware, software, neural, and application-level systems. Its continued development underlies key advances in performance, scalability, adaptability, and interpretability in advanced computing and AI.