arXiv:2608.06953cs.CLcs.AI2026-08

让观点立场显式表达,能显著提升记忆压缩下的保留率。

Explicit, Not Longer: What Makes Epistemic Stance Survive Memory Compression

  • 将立场信息作为独立标签而非括号附注存储
  • 显式标注使保留率提升约15分,优于单纯增加长度
  • 适合关注大模型记忆机制与信息压缩的研究者

智能体的记忆系统会压缩存储内容,而压缩过程常会剔除修饰性词汇,导致陈述的不确定性程度难以保留。本文探究何种因素影响立场在压缩后仍能留存。通过对比相同内容但立场位置不同的记录,在7个语义层级中测试60个命题,发现将立场以标签形式明确写出,相比括号注释可使保留率提高约15分(一模型37→2,另一模型30→8;置换检验p=0.00005)。预注册复现实验在Haiku上得到+15.6分(38→1)。消融分析显示:标签形式在两模型中均有帮助(+9.7和+12.8),但长度无益;将立场表述为完整句子在一模型中贡献最大(+12.5),另一模型则无效(+0.6)。两种模型推断出不同机制,因此仅采纳交集结论:应显式表达立场,而非简单延长文本。无模型确定性读取重现了核心方向及五组消融对比,但未再现长度或标签效应,故不主张其通用性。50份人工标注(kappa=0.75)一致性良好,七处分歧全文列出。另报告九项撤回命题,其中三项曾为本文原标题主张。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Agent memory systems compress what they store, and compression is built to drop qualifiers, so a claim's epistemic standing tends not to survive being written to memory. We ask what governs whether it does. Matched notes carry the identical claim and identical stance and differ only in where that stance sits; one model compresses both under the same budget among the same filler notes, and a blind reader that never sees the condition scores the result. Across 60 claims in seven registers, writing the stance as a labelled field rather than a bracketed aside raises retention by about 15 points on two models (37 claims to 2 on one, 30 to 8 on the other; permutation p=0.00005), and a pre-registered replication on Haiku, its prediction and decision rule committed before the run, gives +15.6 points, 38 claims to 1. Ablating the format on both models gives the same net effect from different parts: labels help on both (+9.7 and +12.8) and length helps on neither, but wording the stance as a full sentence is the largest component on one model (+12.5) and worth nothing on the other (+0.6). Either model alone would have licensed a confident and different mechanism, so we claim only the intersection: make the stance explicit, not merely longer, and expect the best way of being explicit to depend on the model. A deterministic readout with no model reproduces the two-cell direction and five of seven ablation contrasts, but not length or labels, which we therefore do not claim on one instrument. Fifty hand labels (kappa=0.75) agree on direction; we print their seven disagreements in full. We also report nine withdrawn claims, three of them former title claims of this paper.

记忆压缩立场表达大模型

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。