📄 Paper: According to Me: Long-Term Personalized Referential Memory QA
🌐 Project Page: https://atmbench.github.io/
🏆 Live Leaderboard: https://atmbench.github.io/leaderboard.html

Table of Contents

• 🗓️ Timeline
• 🤖 General-Purpose Agent Results
• 🧠 Memory-System Baseline Results
• 📊 Oracle and NIAH Results
• 📋 Overview
• 🚀 Quick Start
• 📁 Repository Structure
• 📚 Documentation
• 📖 Citation
• 🔗 Links
• 📝 License

🗓️ Timeline

• 2026-03-03: arXiv paper release (2603.01990)
• 2026-03-04: Initial codebase release, including baseline implementations for MMRAG, Oracle, NIAH, and four ported third-party baselines (A-Mem, HippoRAG2, mem0, MemoryOS).
• 2026-03-12: Initial General-Purpose Agent benchmark results release for Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode.
• 2026-03-12: ATM-Bench data release on Hugging Face (ATM-Bench).
• 2026-03-13: Fixed Opencode Token Accounting and updated OpenClaw results.
• 2026-05-15: Released the MemPalace port and added memory-system comparison results.
• 2026-05-27: Released the SimpleMem port and added memory-system comparison results.
• 2026-05-28: Released the Pi Agent Benchmark results.
• 2026-05-30: Released the General-Purpose Agent benchmark harness (agent_systems/) — isolated, per-question runners for Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OpenCode, and OpenClaw.
• 2026-06-07: Updated with more NIAH results and analysis, including the SGM vs. Raw comparison across various multimodal answerers.
• 2026-06-12: Added per-run USD cost estimates to the General-Purpose Agent results.
• 2026-07-18: ATM-Bench-Hard (SGM) released as a Harbor dataset — run any Harbor agent against the 31 hard questions in per-question Docker isolation with harbor run -d atm-bench/atm-bench-hard-sgm (see agent_systems/HARBOR.md).
• 2026-08-06: Added Kimi Code, Antigravity (Gemini, via Harbor) and Volcano Engine coding-plan results, taking the Agent table to every priced run. The leaderboard's full scatter now leaves out the w/o SGM ablations, which were spending 45% of the chart's vertical range on six runs that answer a different question; they remain in every table.
• 2026-08-11: Added the full price-performance scatter with the Pareto frontier to the READMEs — every priced agent run on one chart, uncurated, so the staircase of best-score-per-dollar is visible next to the curated effort-ladder view. The Agent table caught up with it (DeepSeek V4 Flash on Codex, Claude Code and Pi, GLM-5.2 on Codex, Gemini 3.5 Flash low) and then went back to one row per agent × model at its best effort tier — the leaderboard carries every tier.

🤖 General-Purpose Agent Results

🏆 The most up-to-date numbers live on the ATM-Bench Live Leaderboard. The static snapshot below may lag behind new submissions.

General-Purpose Agent results on ATM-Bench-Hard are summarized below. The QS score here uses gpt-5-mini as the primary judge.

Pareto frontier

Price vs. Performance

A curated snapshot from 2026-06-28, kept short on purpose — it does not include the models added since (DeepSeek V4 Flash, Doubao, Kimi K2.7 and K3, GLM-5.2, MiniMax M3, Gemini, LongCat) or the reasoning-effort sweeps. The charts above are current, and every run is on the live leaderboard.

Agent	Model	QS (Acc.) ↑	Total Tokens ↓	Cost (USD) ↓
Claude Code	Claude Opus 4.7 (max)	46.6%	6.9M	$9.58
Claude Code	Claude Opus 4.6	33.8%	4.9M	$8.01
Claude Code	Claude Opus 4.7	39.5%	5.0M	$7.70
Claude Code	Claude Opus 4.7 (w/o SGM)	23.1%	17.0M	$19.84
Claude Code	Claude Opus 4.8	41.6%	4.4M	$7.49
Codex	GPT-5.2	39.7%	15.5M	—
Codex	GPT-5.2 (w/o SGM)	16.3%	22.2M	$9.22
Codex	GPT-5.5	41.4%	16.1M	$27.17
Codex	GPT-5.5 (xhigh)	48.1%	22.9M	$39.74
OpenCode	GLM-5	27.0%	16.9M	$14.92
OpenCode	Qwen3.5-397B-A17B	24.5%	12.1M	$4.93
OpenCode	Kimi K2.5	30.3%	8.5M	$1.81
OpenCode	Kimi K2.5 (w/o SGM)	6.5%	21.4M	$6.40
OpenCode	MiniMax M2.5	22.9%	14.5M	$4.43
OpenCode	MiniMax M2.7	27.8%	13.5M	$1.36
OpenClaw 🦞	Kimi K2.5	25.4%	9.6M	$2.37
Pi	GLM-5.1	38.8%	8.2M	$4.33
Pi	Kimi K2.5	37.8%	9.9M	$2.67
Pi	MiMo v2.5	36.1%	18.2M	$2.06
Pi	MiniMax M3	43.2%	15.6M	$3.39
Pi	Qwen3.6-27B	38.5%	7.1M	$2.45
Pi	Qwen3.6-27B (w/o SGM)	16.6%	20.8M	$6.29

Cost is the API-equivalent estimate for one full ATM-Bench-Hard run (31 questions), calculated from saved per-call token counters with Tokdash's bundled standard short-context rates. It does not represent Codex subscription charges.

• Coding agents use their default configuration unless the model label states a reasoning effort such as max or xhigh.
• The same model can differ by several points across harnesses — GLM-5.2 scores 47.7% under Claude Code and 45.1% under Pi, Kimi K2.7 Code 47.0% / 39.2% / 37.8% under Claude Code, Pi and OpenCode. Harness and model are one system here, not two independent factors.

The coding agents still struggle on ATM-Bench-Hard, although they perform much better than various agentic memory baselines.

To reproduce these runs, see the General-Purpose Agent harness under agent_systems/, which provides isolated, per-question runners for Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OpenCode, and OpenClaw. Two harnesses in the table are not in that set: Kimi Code runs through its own CLI, and Antigravity (the Gemini rows) runs under Harbor against the published atm-bench-hard-sgm dataset.

🧠 Memory-System Baseline Results

Unless noted, memory-system baselines below use Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct-FP8 as the answerer and Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct as the memory processor and the captioner. ATM-Bench-Hard uses the atm-bench-hard release set, so results may differ from the original preprint.

System	Index Time (hr) ↓	ATM-Bench QS ↑	ATM-Bench Recall@10 ↑	ATM-Bench-Hard QS ↑	ATM-Bench-Hard Recall@10 ↑
A-Mem	12.6	44.8	66.4	9.9	31.7
mem0	16.7	43.5	61.9	9.2	23.7
MemoryOS	36.6	47.2	59.2	13.7	32.7
HippoRAG2	1.5	42.9	66.4	9.4	31.9
MemPalace	0.5	56.8	76.4	9.7	28.3
SimpleMem	15.7	27.3	23.3	3.2	7.0
Memexa (DeepSeek-V4-flash mem+ans, Qwen3.6-27B captions)	—	68.0*	79.1	47.9*	44.7†
ATM-RAG (Ours)	0.5	51.0	68.7	8.4	28.8

• * marks QS measured with a DeepSeek-V4-flash judge rather than the gpt-5-mini judge used for the other rows. † marks ATM-Bench-Hard Recall reported on fixed Qwen3-VL-2B captions, although the submitted Hard QS run answers from Qwen3.6-27B captions.

📊 Oracle and NIAH Results

We report QS for the Oracle ceiling and the NIAH haystack sweep (k=25/50/100) for multimodal answerers under both SGM and Raw (real images/video) settings, on the 31-question ATM-Bench-Hard split (gpt-5-mini judge).

For the full report, see the ATM-Bench Live Leaderboard.

SGM

Model	Context Window	Parameters	Oracle	NIAH-25	NIAH-50	NIAH-100
Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct	256K	8B LM (~9B total)	28.0	16.3	15.8	12.7
MiniMax-M3	1M	428B total / 23B active	60.5	45.9	55.1	43.4
MiMo-V2.5	1M	310B total / 15B active	44.6	39.1	34.5	31.8
Kimi-K2.5	256K	1T total / 32B active	41.9	47.9	39.6	33.5
Qwen3.6-27B	262K	27B LM	42.8	39.2	29.6	27.4
≈ input context depth	—	—	≈4.5K	≈12K	≈22K	≈44K

Raw (images/video)

Model	Context Window	Parameters	Oracle	NIAH-25	NIAH-50	NIAH-100
Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct	256K	8B LM (~9B total)	40.1	25.4	24.9	10.9
MiniMax-M3	1M	428B total / 23B active	61.8	41.8	34.2	35.2
MiMo-V2.5	1M	310B total / 15B active	52.1	43.3	33.1	23.6
Kimi-K2.5	256K	1T total / 32B active	57.1	45.4	failed	failed
Qwen3.6-27B	262K	27B LM	62.3	50.5	failed	failed
≈ input context depth	—	—	≈6.5K	≈18K	≈31K	≈60K

Why SGM, not raw? Raw outperforms SGM at the Oracle ceiling. But that advantage collapses under realistic conditions: as the haystack fills with distractors, raw degrades and even fails (payload/context limits), and under agentic retrieval the gap is stark — every "w/o SGM" (raw) agent lands far below its SGM run. SGM is the representation that holds up once there is noise under realistic conditions.

failed = the request exceeded the model's maximum allowed image/video count, or the API server's maximum upload/payload size, so that pool could not be served — a serving limit, not a model-quality result.

📋 Overview

Existing long-term memory benchmarks focus primarily on dialogue history, failing to capture realistic personalized references grounded in lived experience. ATM-Bench addresses this gap with:

• 🖼️ Multimodal and multi-source data: Images, videos, emails
• 📅 Long-term horizon: ~4 years of personal memory
• 🎯 Referential queries: Resolving personalized references (e.g., "Show me the moments where Grace was trying to be sneaky...")
• 🔍 Evidence-grounded: Human-annotated QA pairs with ground-truth memory evidence
• 🧩 Multi-evidence reasoning: Queries requiring evidence from multiple sources
• ⚡ Conflicting evidence: Handling contradictory information

Memory Ingestion

Memory Ingestion is decomposed into:

1. Memory preprocessing (how each memory item is represented)
2. Memory organization (how items are structured/linked)

Memory Preprocessing

We compare two preprocessing representations:

• Descriptive Memory (DM): each memory item is represented as one natural-language description.
• Schema-Guided Memory (SGM): each memory item is represented with fixed text-based key-value fields under a schema.

In SGM, schema fields are modality-aware. For example:

• Image/Video memory: time, location, entities, ocr, tags
• Email memory: time, summary, body

DM and SGM contain the same underlying information but use different formats.

In this codebase, DM is implemented as caption/description-style text, while SGM is implemented as schema-based key-value text fields.

Memory Organization

For organization of the memory store:

• Piled Memory: items are stored without explicit links.
• Linked Memory: items are linked with inferred relations (graph structure); agentic systems can additionally update existing items during organization.

NIAH Evaluation Setup

In addition to end-to-end retrieval + generation evaluation, we provide NIAH (Needle In A Haystack):

• Each question is paired with a fixed evidence pool (niah_evidence_ids) that contains all ground-truth items.
• The rest of the pool is filled with realistic distractors.
• This isolates answer generation/reasoning quality from retrieval quality.

See:

• docs/niah.md

🚀 Quick Start

Download Dataset

ATM-Bench is hosted on Hugging Face at Jingbiao/ATM-Bench. A one-shot script downloads the full released dataset and stages the files where the evaluation scripts expect them.

Full download (~3.3 GB) — includes QA, NIAH pools, preprocessed memory, emails, raw images, raw videos, and the GPS reverse-geocoding cache:

bash scripts/download_data.sh

This populates:

data/atm-bench/atm-bench.json
data/atm-bench/atm-bench-hard.json
data/atm-bench/niah/...
data/raw_memory/email/emails.json                   # emails
data/raw_memory/image/...                           # raw images
data/raw_memory/video/...                           # raw videos
data/raw_memory/geocoding_cache/...                 # GPS reverse-geocoding cache
output/image/qwen3vl2b/batch_results.json           # preprocessed image memory
output/video/qwen3vl2b/batch_results.json           # preprocessed video memory

The HF files data/processed_memory/{image,video}_batch_results.json are automatically renamed/copied into output/image/qwen3vl2b/batch_results.json and output/video/qwen3vl2b/batch_results.json by the script.

The script uses the huggingface_hub Python package (installed automatically if missing). If the dataset is private, run huggingface-cli login first.

Installation

conda create -n atmbench python=3.11 -y
conda activate atmbench
pip install -r requirements.txt
pip install -e .

API Keys

Set via environment variables:

export OPENAI_API_KEY="your-key"
export VLLM_API_KEY="your-key"

Or use local key files (gitignored):

• api_keys/.openai_key
• api_keys/.vllm_key

Prepare Memory Files

Before running baselines, the image/video batch_results.json files must exist under output/{image,video}/qwen3vl2b/. You have two options:

Option A (recommended): download the preprocessed memory from Hugging Face.

If you already ran bash scripts/download_data.sh above, the preprocessed memory files are already staged at:

• output/image/qwen3vl2b/batch_results.json
• output/video/qwen3vl2b/batch_results.json

Nothing more to do — you can skip straight to the Quick commands.

Option B: regenerate the memory files from raw images/videos.

Only needed if you want to re-run preprocessing (for example, to try a different VLM or your own raw memory). Requires raw images under data/raw_memory/image/ and videos under data/raw_memory/video/:

# Optional but recommended: preload reverse-geocoding cache
# Cache files are keyed by media filename stem, so the cache bundle must match
# the current image/video filenames.
bash scripts/memory_processor/image/copy_gps_cache.sh output/image/qwen3vl2b/cache
bash scripts/memory_processor/video/copy_gps_cache.sh output/video/qwen3vl2b/cache

# Generate memory itemization results
bash scripts/memory_processor/image/memory_itemize/run_qwen3vl2b.sh
bash scripts/memory_processor/video/memory_itemize/run_qwen3vl2b.sh

Quick commands (MMRAG + Oracle)

# MMRAG (runs both ATM-bench and ATM-bench-hard)
#   Needs: `bash scripts/download_data.sh`
#        + a running vLLM endpoint at http://127.0.0.1:8000/v1/chat/completions
#          serving Qwen/Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct-FP8 (override with VLLM_ENDPOINT /
#          ANSWERER_MODEL env vars).
bash scripts/QA_Agent/MMRAG/run.sh

# Oracle with Qwen3-VL-8B on raw images/videos (local upper bound)
#   Needs: `bash scripts/download_data.sh`
#        + a running vLLM endpoint serving Qwen/Qwen3-VL-8B-Instruct-FP8.
bash scripts/QA_Agent/Oracle/run_oracle_qwen3vl8b_raw.sh

# Oracle with GPT-5 on raw images/videos (no local GPU / vLLM)
#   Needs: `bash scripts/download_data.sh`
#        + OPENAI_API_KEY set in the environment or api_keys/.openai_key.
bash scripts/QA_Agent/Oracle/run_oracle_gpt5.sh

Baseline Compatibility and Environments

• Core baselines (MMRAG, Oracle, NIAH) are tested in the main atmbench environment.

• Third-party memory-system baselines in this repo include:

  • A-Mem
  • HippoRAG2
  • mem0
  • MemoryOS
  • MemPalace
  • SimpleMem

• MemoryOS and MemPalace are strongly recommended to run in separate conda environments. MemoryOS uses a FAISS / sentence-transformers stack, while MemPalace uses ChromaDB / ONNX-backed local embeddings; isolating them avoids dependency collisions with the core baseline environment and each other.

• A-Mem, HippoRAG2, and mem0 are tested to be compatible with the core baseline environment, but separate environments are still safer for reproducibility and dependency isolation.

• SimpleMem runs against a sibling clone of the upstream repo (LanceDB + Tantivy FTS stack); see memqa/qa_agent_baselines/SimpleMem/README.md. Pinned upstream commit: 094027eca4c890dc9912be8cee1da04428de8076 (verified by scripts/QA_Agent/SimpleMem/run.sh).

• Setup references for the vendored baselines are under third_party/:

  • third_party/A-mem/
  • third_party/HippoRAG/
  • third_party/mem0/
  • third_party/MemoryOS/

• MemPalace ships as a PyPI package (mempalace==3.3.5) and is installed via memqa/qa_agent_baselines/Mempalace/requirements.txt — no third_party/ vendoring.

• SimpleMem is not vendored under third_party/. Clone the upstream repo at the pinned commit alongside ATMBench and point SIMPLEMEM_DIR at it (defaults to ../SimpleMem):

  git clone https://github.com/aiming-lab/SimpleMem.git ../SimpleMem
  git -C ../SimpleMem checkout 094027eca4c890dc9912be8cee1da04428de8076
  pip install -r ../SimpleMem/requirements.txt
  pip install -r memqa/qa_agent_baselines/SimpleMem/requirements.txt
  

• The General-Purpose Agent evaluation harness for all five agents (Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OpenCode, OpenClaw) ships under agent_systems/.

For detailed setup, data layout, and reproducibility settings, see:

• docs/README.md
• docs/data.md
• docs/reproducibility.md
• docs/baseline.md
• docs/niah.md

📁 Repository Structure

ATMBench/
├── memqa/              # Core memory QA implementation
├── scripts/            # Experiment scripts
├── docs/               # Documentation
├── data/               # Data directory (user-provided)
├── third_party/        # Vendored agentic memory systems
└── output/             # Experiment outputs (gitignored)

📚 Documentation

• docs/README.md - Getting started guide
• docs/data.md - Data format and preparation
• docs/baseline.md - Baseline implementations
• docs/niah.md - NIAH protocol and usage
• docs/metrics.md - Evaluation metrics
• docs/reproducibility.md - Reproduction instructions
• docs/repo_structure.md - Repository organization

📖 Citation

If you use ATM-Bench in your research, please cite:

@article{mei2026atm,
  title={According to Me: Long-Term Personalized Referential Memory QA},
  author={Mei, Jingbiao and Chen, Jinghong and Yang, Guangyu and Hou, Xinyu and Li, Margaret and Byrne, Bill},
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.01990},
  year={2026},
  url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.01990},
  doi={10.48550/arXiv.2603.01990}
}

🔗 Links

• 📄 Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.01990
• 🌐 Project Page: https://atmbench.github.io/
• 🏆 Live Leaderboard: https://atmbench.github.io/leaderboard.html
• 🤗 Dataset: https://huggingface.co/datasets/Jingbiao/ATM-Bench
• 💻 Code: https://github.com/JingbiaoMei/ATM-Bench
• 🐛 Issues: https://github.com/JingbiaoMei/ATM-Bench/issues

📝 License

This project is licensed under the MIT License - see the LICENSE file for details.