让AI记忆像数据库一样可靠,通过结构化框架精准存取事实。
From Unstructured Recall to Schema-Grounded Memory: Reliable AI Memory via Iterative, Schema-Aware Extraction

- 写入时分步提取对象、字段和值,用验证关卡确保准确
- 在真实任务中达到97.1%的F1分数,远超现有系统
- 适合需要精确状态与更新的生产级AI应用
持久化AI记忆常被简化为检索问题:将过往交互存为文本,嵌入后由模型后期召回。这种设计适用于主题回忆,但不满足生产级智能体的需求——如精确事实、当前状态、更新删除、聚合关系、否定查询和显式未知。这些操作要求记忆更像一个记录系统而非搜索工具。本文主张可靠外部记忆必须基于模式(schema)约束。我们提出一种迭代式、模式感知的写入路径,将记忆摄入分解为对象检测、字段检测与字段值提取,并引入验证关卡、本地重试与状态化提示控制。该设计将理解重心从读取路径转移到写入路径:读取变为对已验证记录的受限查询,而非重复推断检索到的段落。我们在结构化提取与端到端记忆基准上评估该方法。在提取基准上,裁判-闭环配置达到90.42%的对象级准确率和62.67%输出准确率,超越所有测试前沿结构化输出基线。在端到端记忆基准上,xmemory达到97.10% F1,高于第三方基线的80.16%-87.24%。在应用级任务中,xmemory达95.2%准确率,优于专用记忆系统、代码生成的Markdown封装及客户侧前沿模型应用封装。结果表明,对于需稳定事实与状态计算的记忆负载,架构设计比检索规模或模型强度更重要。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Persistent AI memory is often reduced to a retrieval problem: store prior interactions as text, embed them, and ask the model to recover relevant context later. This design is useful for thematic recall, but it is mismatched to the kinds of memory that agents need in production: exact facts, current state, updates and deletions, aggregation, relations, negative queries, and explicit unknowns. These operations require memory to behave less like search and more like a system of record. This paper argues that reliable external AI memory must be schema-grounded. Schemas define what must be remembered, what may be ignored, and which values must never be inferred. We present an iterative, schema-aware write path that decomposes memory ingestion into object detection, field detection, and field-value extraction, with validation gates, local retries, and stateful prompt control. The result shifts interpretation from the read path to the write path: reads become constrained queries over verified records rather than repeated inference over retrieved prose. We evaluate this design on structured extraction and end-to-end memory benchmarks. On the extraction benchmark, the judge-in-the-loop configuration reaches 90.42% object-level accuracy and 62.67% output accuracy, above all tested frontier structured-output baselines. On our end-to-end memory benchmark, xmemory reaches 97.10% F1, compared with 80.16%-87.24% across the third-party baselines. On the application-level task, xmemory reaches 95.2% accuracy, outperforming specialised memory systems, code-generated Markdown harnesses, and customer-facing frontier-model application harnesses. The results show that, for memory workloads requiring stable facts and stateful computation, architecture matters more than retrieval scale or model strength alone.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。