Will My Assistant Remember My Allergy? What Personal LLM Assistants Forget When Conversation Memory Is Compressed

Key Findings

• — When the future question is hidden during compression, an allergy mentioned in passing survives to the moment it is needed 0 to 1% of the time, versus 97% with full memory.
• — Published eviction benchmarks report keeping such facts at a 20% budget because they compress a prompt that already contains the user's future question, a foresight no cache-reusing assistant has.
• — None of the training-free eviction policies evaluated ranks the fact high enough, and the budget needed to keep it is too large to be worth compressing.
• — The authors conclude that a compressed cache is an inference-reuse mechanism, not a persistence layer, and that safety-critical facts need an auditable episodic store and an interface that asks rather than invents.

Methodology Notes

Constructed benchmark (PA-Bench, 100 conversations) on open-weight models with standard KV-cache eviction policies; no real users or deployed products. arXiv 2609.05767 version 1, 4 September 2026 (announced 9 September); accepted at ACM HumanSys 2026 (workshop).

Sources