MemTrapBench: Benchmarking Cognitive Traps in LLM Memory Use

Paper · arXiv 2608.20202 · Published August 20, 2026
LLM Memory

Memory has become a key component of large language models, enabling them to retain information and learn from longterm interactions. However, existing memory benchmarks mainly evaluate whether information is correctly extracted, stored, and retrieved, while largely overlooking how retrieved memories reshape model reasoning and affect performance on the current task. We identify memory-induced cognitive traps: even faithfully recorded and semantically relevant memories can distort model reasoning or beliefs and degrade current task performance. To systematically evaluate these failure modes, we introduce MemTrapBench, which covers two forms of cognitive traps: Reasoning Fixation and Belief Distortion. Experiments across two model families and five representative memory frameworks show that MemTrapBench is challenging: all evaluated memory strategies underperform the nomemory setting, with even the strongest methods suffering drops of more than 10%. To mitigate these cognitive traps, we propose AdaptiveMem, a simple yet effective inference-time method that instructs LLMs to avoid memory traps. AdaptiveMem mitigates cognitive traps on MemTrapBench while preserving or improving performance on standard memory benchmarks across diverse memory frameworks 1.

Introduction. Recent memory frameworks have made substantial progress (Huang et al. 2026; Zhang et al. 2025; Yu et al. 2026; Zhang et al. 2026c,b; Tan et al. 2026; Hu et al. 2025) in extending the effective context available to large language models (LLMs) and agents (Du et al. 2025; Wu et al. 2025b; Hu et al. 2025; Chen et al. 2026; Yan et al. 2026). Most existing studies focus on constructing and maintaining external memory from long interaction histories, then retrieving relevant information to support subsequent queries (Behrouz, Zhong, and Mirrokni 2025; Xu et al. 2026a; Chhikara et al. 2025; Tan et al. 2025b; Shen et al. 2026; Uddin et al. 2026; Wang et al. 2025a; Tavakoli et al. 2025). Accordingly, existing benchmarks primarily assess memory extraction, storage, updating, and retrieval (Tan et al. 2025a; Wu et al. 2025a; Hu, Wang, and McAuley 2025). Yet memory is not always what we need, as it may impair rather than enhance model capabilities. Prior

Discussion / Conclusion. We introduce MemTrapBench, a benchmark for evaluating memory-induced cognitive traps in LLMs. Experiments across multiple models and memory strategies show that MemTrapBench remains challenging for existing memory frameworks. We further propose AdaptiveMem, a simple yet effective approach for more reliable memory use.

Lines of inquiry this paper opens 24

Research framings built by reading the notes related to this paper — the questions it feeds into.

Can inference-time computation adaptively substitute for static model capacity? What explains the gap between benchmark scores and true reasoning capability? What makes agent memory systems durable and reusable across sessions? How can persistent memory architectures preserve information across ultra-long contexts? Do accumulated memories help or hurt continual learning in models? How should retrieval strategies adapt to multi-step reasoning demands? What unique functions do genuine emotions provide beyond simulated responses? Can AI agents improve their skills through accumulated experience and reuse? What prevents LLMs from applying their reasoning knowledge to improve outputs? What are the fundamental limits of prompting for language models? Should agents compress episodic memory or retain raw interaction histories? Why do retrieval-augmented generation systems fail in practice despite sound architecture?