























Abstract:Coding agents accumulate extensive context during long-running tasks, yet fixed context windows force practitioners to choose between truncation and task failure. While numerous memory condensation strategies have been proposed, from simple sliding windows to LLM-generated summaries, no systematic comparison exists to guide strategy selection, especially in scientific discovery tasks. We evaluate eight memory condensation strategies using GPT-4o on sixty DiscoveryBench tasks spanning six scientific domains (480 total evaluations). We find that no condenser significantly alters hypothesis quality, while LLM-based condensers increase token costs by 24-94 percent, and masking tool-call outputs achieves an 8.6 percent net savings. We also observe that the optimal condenser for data-driven scientific discovery varies by scientific domain and task length.
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.18854 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2605.18854v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.18854 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite |
From: Renuka Chintalapati [view email]
[v1]
Wed, 13 May 2026 13:10:41 UTC (1,879 KB)
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理,仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。