Large Language Model (LLM) agents are commonly trained from expert trajectories using supervised fine-tuning (SFT), which treats multi-turn agent behavior as ordinary text imitation. This recipe is simple and low-cost, but it only learns to imitate the sequence of expert actions, rather than training the agent to choose the right action against plausible mistakes at each state. Existing methods to mitigate this problem include preference learning or reinforcement learning, but they usually need high-cost environment rollouts and reward models. We propose Agentic-DPO, a lightweight offline agent policy optimization method that turns expert trajectories into state-conditioned preference supervision. At each expert action state, Agentic-DPO samples a one-step action from the current state, treats plausible wrong actions as negatives, and contrasts them with the expert action using a DPO-style preference objective. To avoid mixing both policy and schema in preference learning, we introduce Policy-Preserving Augmentation (PPA), which renders the same latent trajectory under multiple schemas while keeping the expert policy fixed. Agentic-DPO requires no online environment rollout, reward model, or full-trajectory student exploration. We conduct experiments across StableToolBench, tau-bench retail, and Mind2Web, where Agentic-DPO consistently improves agents at different model scales beyond imitation. In particular, it raises tau-bench accuracy from 21.7% (SFT) to 41.4% for a 9B model, matching online GRPO under the same backbone with only step-level rollouts and without environment interaction during gradient steps. The results suggest that expert trajectories can support low-cost agentic policy optimization when converted from demonstrations into state-level action preferences. Code for Agentic-DPO is released at https://github.com/Schuture/Agentic-DPO.
Memory is becoming a core component of long-horizon AI agents, allowing agents to reuse past experience when operating web browsers, software tools, and other interactive environments. Existing work mostly treats memory as a supply problem, asking what experience to write, how to store it, and which entry to retrieve for the next task. Yet we still lack a clear account of how models consume retrieved memory across a multi-step action trajectory. This consumption process matters because it determines not only what memories should be retrieved, but also what models and control policies are needed to use them safely. To diagnose this process, we propose Entry--Propagation--Recovery (E-P-R), a trajectory-level framework that asks where memory first changes an action, whether that change carries forward, and whether the agent can recover after leaving a correct path. We instantiate E-P-R on WebArena and on MemTrapBench, a controlled benchmark we build to isolate these phases. We find that the main failure often begins at entry: agents adopt conflicting memory at the first exposed decision point even when it is task-wrong. Repeated exposure then amplifies this early error, while recovery after divergence is weak. Together, these effects create a compliance trap: across models, conflicting memory induces similar compliance rates, but once agents comply, their success rates collapse to a low floor. Stronger agents therefore suffer larger absolute damage because each compliance event erases more baseline capability. These results suggest that memory-augmented agents should be evaluated not only by retrieval quality or final success rate, but by how they consume memory throughout the trajectory.
Yixiong Chen, Xinyi Bai, Alan L. Yuille· 0 citations