Reproducing LightMem: Naive RAG Is Just as Good for Memory Management
Long-term conversational agents require access to information from earlier interactions, such as a user's preferences, past requests, or previously mentioned facts. Repeatedly providing the full dialogue history can be expensive as conversations grow, so many memory approaches instead transform past interactions into compact entries that can be retrieved when needed. LightMem is a recent lightweight memory-management approach that reports strong effectiveness while maintaining relatively low construction cost. However, it still relies on a separate constructed memory representation and is evaluated with only one retriever, leaving unclear how sensitive its results are to retriever choice and whether memory construction discards answer-relevant information. In this study, we reproduce LightMem and compare it with Naive RAG, which retrieves directly from raw user turns. We recover LightMem's main configuration trend, but find that retriever choice is a major source of performance variation: changing only the retriever over a fixed LightMem store shifts answer accuracy from 58.1% to 75.5%. Constructed memories also do not consistently outperform raw-turn retrieval. Naive RAG generally performs better at matched retrieval depths, whereas LightMem performs better mainly under tight answering-token budgets. Oracle evaluation further shows that memory construction removes some answer-relevant information. Overall, LightMem offers a context-efficiency trade-off rather than a general advantage over Naive RAG. Its value depends on the retriever and available token budget, motivating future work on retrieval, reranking, query formulation, and their interaction with raw and constructed memory representations.