0

Fidelity Before Structure: Verbatim Chunks Beat Lossy Artifact Extraction in Long-Conversation LLM Memory

A growing class of conversational-memory systems compresses dialogue history into structured artifacts (extracted facts, decisions, or events) on the premise that distilled structure retrieves better than raw text.

Preview
Year
2025
Venue
arXiv 2025
Authors
1
Hosting
Full text hostedCC-BY-4.0

Cite

Notes

Only stored in your browser.

Attribution

Abstract & full text
arxiv.org/abs/2601.00821CC-BY-4.0
TL;DR
Semantic Scholar
Attribution policy →

Abstract

A growing class of conversational-memory systems compresses dialogue history into structured artifacts (extracted facts, decisions, or events) on the premise that distilled structure retrieves better than raw text. We test this premise with a controlled ablation: within one fixed retrieval--rerank--reasoning pipeline, we swap only the stored representation (LLM-extracted typed artifacts versus verbatim conversation chunks), holding the model, retriever, reranker, and judge constant. Verbatim chunks win by 15.9 points on LoCoMo (43.9% vs. 28.0%) and 22.0 points on LongMemEval-S (67.4% vs. 45.4%); a 1-hop semantic graph does not recover the gap, and six confound controls reproduce the effect. The mechanism is lossy distillation, not structure per se: accuracy tracks how much source text survives in the store, and the extracted-artifact pipeline does not beat naive RAG in overall accuracy (though chunks abstain worse; see Limitations). For the extraction designs we test, structured memory should augment verbatim text rather than replace it: adding artifacts alongside chunks preserves accuracy; substituting them forfeits the gap. Code and data: https://github.com/tao-hpu/cog-canvas

Authors

1