Multi-Conv RL-Based Memory Agent

• Multi-Conv RL-Based Memory Agent is an advanced LLM-driven system that uses reinforcement learning to manage memory across multi-turn dialogues.
• It incorporates structured memory modules with explicit CRUD operations and specialized tools for efficient information retrieval and updates.
• Empirical evaluations show high accuracy, robust context extrapolation, and improved performance over static architectures in complex tasks.

A Multi-Conv RL-Based Memory Agent is an advanced LLM-driven agent system that leverages reinforcement learning (RL) to perform dynamic memory management across multi-turn or multi-conversation scenarios. Characterized by explicit memory CRUD (create, read, update, delete) operations, high-level memory control policies, and an RL framework that integrates outcome-based credit assignment, these agents represent a convergence of research in LLM orchestration, external memory augmentation, and agentic control. This entry synthesizes the formalism, architecture, RL formulations, memory mechanisms, experimental results, and practical deployment strategies as found in recent literature.

1. System Architecture and Key Components

A Multi-Conv RL-Based Memory Agent comprises a modular design for scalable and controllable memory management within or across dialogue sessions. The principal architectural features include:

• Central Agentic Policy: Core coordination is performed by a policy $\pi_{\theta}$ operating over a sequence of actions that include natural language generation and discrete tool calls for memory operations (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026, Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026).
• Structured Memory Module: Persistent external storage is maintained, which holds task-relevant information, user profiles, semantic contexts, and procedural routines in various organized forms (e.g., stack, pool, vector store) (Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025, Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025, Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025).
• Multi-Session Support: The agent maintains separate memory stacks or banks for independent dialogues or tasks, each governed by its own lifecycle but also leveraging a shared or global experience store (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).
• Specialized Tools/Plugins: Memory operations are exposed via tool APIs (e.g., "Add_memory", "Retrieve_memory"), formalized within function-call frameworks for seamless invocation and tracking (Cao et al., 20 Nov 2025, Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026).
• Supporting Subagents: In hierarchical configurations (e.g., StackPlanner), a central coordinator supervises subtask executors (LLM-based workers) for modularity and parallelization (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).

2. Explicit Memory Operations and Representation

Memory management in these systems uses a structured, multi-component approach that distinguishes between short-term (STM) and long-term memory (LTM):

STM: The ongoing prompt context—typically the most recent user/system/tool turns—serves as working memory, bounded by the LLM context window (Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026).

LTM: Maintained externally, LTM is implemented as a list (stack, pool, or index) of memory entries, each possibly enriched with dense embeddings and metadata for rapid retrieval:

• Core Memory: Global, holistic summaries maintained as fixed-size tokens.
• Semantic Memory: Sets of atomic fact-statements, supporting CRUD operations individually.
• Episodic Memory: Time-stamped event logs for session or user histories.

Key memory manipulation actions are:

• Add: Insert a new content unit.
• Update: Modify or rewrite an existing entry.
• Delete: Remove an entry, often guided by semantic similarity or recency/relevance scores.
• Retrieve: Query the memory for top-k relevant items, using embedding-based semantic similarity or BM25 ranking.
• Summarize/Condense: Aggregate contiguous or thematically clustered entries into a compressed block, essential for context bloat control (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).

All memory tools are surfaced as function calls that are part of the agent’s action space and may be selected at any decision point during multi-turn trajectories (Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026).

3. Reinforcement Learning Formulation

Multi-Conv RL-Based Memory Agents formulate memory control and utilization as a sequential decision-making problem under the RL paradigm. The main elements are:

• State Space: The observed state at each timestep $t$ includes the current STM context, LTM state, and task metadata: $s_t = (C_t, \mathcal{M}_t, \mathcal{T})$ (Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026), $s_t = (\mathcal{M}_{t-1}, c_t)$ (Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025).
• Action Space: Each action comprises a hybrid of generation and discrete memory operations, such as selecting (or batching) calls to Add, Update, Delete, Retrieve, or NOOP (no operation) (Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025).
• Transition Function: Deterministic application of operations to the memory system, updating $M_t$ post-action (Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025).
• Reward Functions: Rewards are computed from task-level end metrics (e.g., exact match, F1 score), auxiliary shaping signals (context compression, memory quality), formatting success, and content relevance as judged by LLMs or specialized scorers (Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026, Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025, Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025).
• Credit Assignment: For sparse or trajectory-level rewards, Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) is employed, computing population-normalized advantages across batched rollouts and propagating reward signals backward to all causally relevant actions (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026, Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025, Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026).

Typical optimization objectives use PPO or direct-advantage PPO variants:

$$J(\theta) = \mathbb{E} \left[ \sum_t \min(\rho_t A_t, \text{clip}(\rho_t, 1-\epsilon, 1+\epsilon) A_t) - \beta D_\text{KL}(\pi_\theta \| \pi_\text{ref}) \right]$$

where $\rho_t$ is the importance ratio and $A_t$ is the GRPO or GAE advantage (Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025, Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).

4. Memory Workflow and Multi-Conversation Management

The agent processes incoming data as a segmental stream. For each chunk or dialogue turn:

1. Read/Write Loop: The agent consumes a chunk $c_t$ along with the current memory $\mathcal{M}_{t-1}$, selects and executes a set of memory operations, and updates its state (Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025, Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025).
2. Memory Pruning/Condensation: To prevent unbounded growth, the memory stack is regularly pruned or condensed according to learned criteria balancing recency, relevance, and context constraints. LRU or detailed recency-relevance scoring schemes may be used (Cao et al., 20 Nov 2025).
3. Retrieval and Context Packing: Upon retrieval, a selection of top-k relevant memories is prepended to the STM before answer generation or further reasoning (Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025).
4. Session Scoping: Each conversation or task instance receives its own memory stack, but a global experience memory enables cross-session and cross-task knowledge sharing (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).
5. Distributed/Federated Extensions: Hierarchical or federated coordinator arrangements enable sharing of policy weights or experience across multisession deployments, with local per-session memory and shared global memories (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).

5. Empirical Evaluation and Performance

These agents are validated on long-horizon QA, agentic reasoning, and multi-step task domains. Notable benchmarks include HotpotQA, 2WikiMultiHopQA, MuSiQue, FRAMES, ALFWorld, and RULER-HotpotQA (Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025, Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026, Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026, Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025).

Key findings reported:

• Context Extrapolation: RL-MemAgent achieves >95% accuracy on the RULER test at up to 512K context length, maintaining performance to 3.5M tokens with <5% loss—while fixed-context and RAG baselines collapse (Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025).
• Ablations: Removing active memory control or RL optimization lowers performance by 2–8 absolute points; omitting both collapses accuracy to near-static baselines (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).
• Generalization: RL-trained memory policies, especially with diverse multi-task and multi-turn data, extrapolate to text lengths >13× their training data, indicating learned principles over rote patterns (Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025).
• Retrieval and Memory Quality: RL-based memory management yields higher-quality, more relevant memory stores and lower context-window usage than static or heuristic architectures (Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026).
• Credit Assignment: GRPO vs. standard PPO improves stability and convergence when rewards are delayed and sparse (e.g., answer-only returns) (Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025, Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).

$\begin{array}{l|cccc} \text{Method} & 2Wiki & MuSiQue & GAIA & FRAMES \ \hline \text{StackPlanner} & 32.92 & 16.48 & 7.71 & 16.23 \ \text{ARPO} & 29.55 & 13.38 & 7.71 & 13.49 \ \end{array}$

(Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026)

6. Implementation Guidelines and Practical Considerations

• Memory Stack Limits: Restrict stack or memory pool size (e.g., $T_\text{max} \approx 30$, $M_\text{max}=32$) to control latency and context cost (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026, Cao et al., 20 Nov 2025).
• Condensation Granularity: Summarize 5–10 contiguous memory entries per condensation action, tuning for task horizon (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).
• Reward Shaping: Include per-step penalties for memory size, e.g., $-\gamma \cdot |\mathcal{M}|$, to encourage efficiency (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026).
• Tool API Integration: Implement memory modules as tools or plugins using OpenAI-style or similar function-call interfaces (Cao et al., 20 Nov 2025).
• Pipeline Efficiency: Use asynchronous pipeline dispatchers to overlap tool operations and accelerate training by 1.5× over naive batching (Cao et al., 20 Nov 2025).
• Deployment: For real-world dialogue agents, implement memory size limits, periodic compression/merging, timestamping, and reward shaping for partial credit. Mix in human feedback to refine policy (RLHF) (Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025).

7. Variant Frameworks and Comparative Insights

Several lines of work exemplify the Multi-Conv RL-Based Memory Agent design space:

System	Memory Operations	RL Algorithm	Multi-Conv Design	Extrapolation
StackPlanner (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026)	Stack insert, condense, prune	GRPO	Per-convo stack + global	Cross-task transfer
MemAgent (Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025)	Token overwrite, streaming	DAPO/GRPO	Chunked streaming	8K→3.5M tokens
Agentic Memory (Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026)	Add, update, delete, retrieve, filter	Step-GRPO	Unified STM/LTM action	LTM/STM synergy
Mem-α (Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025)	Batch insert, update, delete	GRPO	Core/semantic/episodic	30K→474K tokens
Memory-R1 (Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025)	Add, update, delete, NOOP	PPO/GRPO	Persistent cross-session	Multi-session QA
SkyRL-Agent (Cao et al., 20 Nov 2025)	Next(chunk), Retrieve(query)	PPO/GRPO	Tool-oriented, async pipelined	High-throughput

This landscape emphasizes explicit action spaces for memory management, direct RL optimization of memory efficacy, and the centrality of structured, persistent memory stores in extending LLMs to long-horizon and multi-conversation tasks.

---

Sources: (Zhang et al., 9 Jan 2026, Yu et al., 3 Jul 2025, Cao et al., 20 Nov 2025, Yu et al., 5 Jan 2026, Wang et al., 30 Sep 2025, Yan et al., 27 Aug 2025)