Structured Memory Mechanisms for Stable Context Representation in Large Language Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the limitations of large language models in understanding long-term context. It proposes a model architecture equipped with a long-term memory mechanism to improve the retention and retrieval of semantic information across paragraphs and dialogue turns. The model integrates explicit memory units, gated writing mechanisms, and attention-based reading modules. A forgetting function is introduced to enable dynamic updates of memory content, enhancing the model’s ability to manage historical information. To further improve the effectiveness of memory operations, the study designs a joint training objective. This combines the main task loss with constraints on memory writing and forgetting. It guides the model to learn better memory strategies during task execution. Systematic evaluation across multiple subtasks shows that the model achieves clear advantages in text generation consistency, stability in multi-turn question answering, and accuracy in crosscontext reasoning. In particular, the model demonstrates strong semantic retention and contextual coherence in long-text tasks and complex question answering scenarios. It effectively mitigates the context loss and semantic drift problems commonly faced by traditional language models when handling long-term dependencies. The experiments also include analysis of different memory structures, capacity sizes, and control strategies. These results further confirm the critical role of memory mechanisms in language understanding. They demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed approach in both architectural design and performance outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".