Agent-memory systems increasingly buy retrieval quality with structure, transforming raw conversation histories into summaries, embeddings, trees, or knowledge graphs before any question is asked. We ask how much of that benefit comes from the structure itself, rather than from competent retrieval over the raw history. We present ReFind, an agent-controlled search interface that builds no semantic structure at all: it leaves the conversation archive unmodified, indexes it lexically at turn granularity, and combines a generic iterative keyword-search loop with four chat-native controls grounded in empirical refinding work: session-aware rank fusion, local context expansion, temporal narrowing, and skipping already-inspected sessions. A separate reasoning stage answers from the collected evidence. Across a broad suite of conversational-memory tasks (single- and multi-hop QA, event ordering, and fact consolidation), roughly 2,800 questions on precise-retrieval and fact-tracking capabilities evaluated under the incremental multi-turn setting of MemoryAgentBench, ReFind attains the highest mean accuracy (58.2) of any system compared, above the strongest graph- and tree-based memory systems (HippoRAG 2, 53.2), all under a GPT-4o-mini backbone matched to every reused baseline. Controlled comparisons to single-shot BM25, a matched generic-agentic BM25 control, component removals, and agentic dense/hybrid variants separately support the roles of agent control, chat-native controls, and lexical retrieval. On LongMemEval-S/M, the same interface reaches 93.2 +/- 3.3 and 89.3 +/- 6.0 with GPT-5-mini. The results indicate that for precise, evidence-grounded questions over chat archives, much of the benefit credited to elaborate memory structures is recoverable by giving an agent controllable search over the unmodified record, with no LLM-based index construction at all.
Ruizhe Li, L. Zhang, Benfeng Xu et al.· 0 citations
Web browsing—widely used for information retrieval and fact verification—has become a fundamental capability of recently emerged large language model (LLM) agents, which is often elicited by training on complex questions requiring web search. However, this task faces challenges with respect to data and training: existing QA datasets are mostly 1-3 hop over closed corpora (e.g., Wikipedia); meanwhile, outcome-based on-policy RL that used by recent works is inefficient and brittle in long-horizon, tool-heavy browsing environments. To address these challenges, we introduce GraphSynthQA, a knowledge-graph (KG)—guided synthesis framework in an open-web setting. Starting from Wikidata seed entities, GraphSynthQA iteratively retrieves and verifies evidence from the internet to expand a KG, then synthesizes complex, answer-verifiable queries grounded in multi-evidence dependencies. Building on the synthesized data, we train web-browsing agents with a compute-efficient two-stage recipe: (i) cold-start supervised fine-tuning on ReAct-style trajectories, and (ii) step-level Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), where preferences are constructed offline via single-step branched rollouts that contrast candidate actions by their downstream success rates, providing dense process supervision without expensive on-policy exploration. Experiments show that our approach consistently improves performance on challenging web-browsing benchmarks and remains competitive among models of similar size.
Chiwei Zhu, Mingxuan Du, Benfeng Xu et al.· Annual International ACM SIG...· 0 citations
Long-term memory systems store what a user says in an external store and retrieve it when a related query arrives. This interface rests on an assumption so natural that it is rarely stated: a memory that is needed will resemble the query that needs it. World knowledge breaks the assumption. A tree-nut allergy should change the answer to a macaron request through their almond-flour ingredient, yet the two texts share no cue a retriever can see. We call this failure mode the implicit-association blind spot and introduce InMind, a 125-task, expert-verified benchmark spanning ten life domains, with 113 tasks grounded in citable public sources. Its paired controls separate three explanations that existing evaluations conflate: the fact was never stored, the model lacks the bridging knowledge, or the fact was stored and never surfaced. The verdict is clean. With the decisive memory placed in context, the backbone answers 84.0 percent of indirect queries; when the same memory must be retrieved, six vector, graph, and agentic memory systems reach at most 14.4 percent, even though they recall the same facts on demand at up to 100 percent. An embedding with eight times the dimensionality raises answer-blind target recall for every system yet leaves the gap essentially intact. A minimal diagnostic probe that keeps memory visible before the query arrives recovers most of the gap, locating the failure in the query-conditioned interface itself and pointing to routing, deciding which facts must stay visible, as the open problem InMind is built to score.
Ruizhe Li, Mingxuan Du, Benfeng Xu et al.· 0 citations
Text-to-image and personalized editing models now synthesize high-fidelity single-subject images with ease. Yet placing multiple named people into shared contact actions such as embrace, carry, or grapple still exposes major failures: fused limbs, invented extremities, and interpenetrating bodies. Existing evaluations largely overlook these anatomical and geometric issues, and VLM-as-a-judge checklists often saturate on Interaction while the errors remain obvious to humans. We introduce MPIE-Bench, a 2,500-sample benchmark of video-mined editing triplets spanning 405 scenes, 14 interaction categories, and four contact densities (C0-C3). We also propose MPIE-Eval, whose two new axes score contact-time geometry from a frozen public multi-person mesh reconstruction. Anatomy asks whether every human-like mass is explained by a complete set of reconstructed bodies, and Interaction asks whether the penetration and surface distance between those bodies match the contact the instruction asked for. Across ten editors, mesh Anatomy tops out at 0.65 and mesh Interaction at 0.72 on two different models, so no single editor is strong on both, while VLM checklists rate the same images above 0.95. A five-rater study confirms that both axes track human judgement more closely than a zero-shot VLM judge, and the rankings hold under ablation of every weight and threshold.
Jiajia Lin, Mingxuan Du, Tuowen Zhou et al.· 0 citations
