Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 10, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Long-term memory benchmarks for language agents primarily evaluate whether information from earlier interactions can be retrieved and used when relevant. Persistent memory systems face an additional problem before future use is known: deciding whether a memory should remain exact, be compressed, consolidated, or deleted. Existing benchmarks capture long-range retrieval, temporal reasoning, evidence reuse, and incremental interaction, but do not directly evaluate these earlier representation decisions. We formalize memory lifecycle evaluation and introduce VitaBench, a benchmark that makes lifecycle decisions measurable through repeated memory reviews and full-horizon counterfactual evaluation. VitaBench contains a controlled Diagnostic tier that isolates future-use patterns and a Naturalistic tier that composes them into generated customer-service-style interaction streams. We characterize lifecycle decision structure with three diagnostics: lifecycle headroom, measuring the advantage of adaptive choices over the best fixed strategy; horizon reversal, measuring when short-horizon decisions change under delayed consequences; and optimal-action diversity, measuring whether different memory states favor different lifecycle operations. Across both tiers, VitaBench exhibits substantial lifecycle structure: lifecycle headroom is 1.364 in Diagnostic and 1.405 in Naturalistic, and 60.2% and 56.5% of states, respectively, change their preferred action between short and full horizons. A learned delayed lifecycle policy further improves over the best fixed strategy on VitaBench-Naturalistic, reaching 101.5 versus 83.4 joint utility. These results show that retrieving past information and deciding how it should persist are distinct evaluation problems, and that lifecycle management requires evaluation of the delayed consequences of representation decisions.