SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Ganesh S

Publications and source records attributed to Ganesh S.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

FluctlightDB: A Memory Model of Data for AI Agents

For fifty years, data systems have answered two questions. The relational model asked which records match a predicate; the vector model asked which vectors lie nearest a query. Neither was built for cue-driven, provenance-weighted recall across long sessions. We propose treating long-term agent memory as a distinct data model -- with its own write semantics (encoding, separation, consolidation, provenance) and read semantics (cue-driven activation across a linked memory graph) -- and present FluctlightDB, an embedded engine that implements this contract via experience() and activate(). We make that case carefully, not categorically: we do not claim novelty over Mem0, Zep, or HippoRAG-style memory layers, only an embedded engine contract beneath them. On LoCoMo (official evidence-recall metric; 10 conversations, 1,982 gold spans), CHORUS recalls 99.0% on an internally reproduced July 2026 run. On LongMemEval-S (500 questions, official session_recall@8), our retrieval harness scores 97.6% (488/500); end-to-end QA with our reader/judge stack scores 97.4% (487/500) -- these layers use different protocols than vendor leaderboard figures we cite for context only. On BEIR SciFact (shared MiniLM embeddings, same harness, Recall Fabric on), CHORUS/PRISM edges Chroma on nDCG@10 (0.646 vs. 0.645) and Recall@10 (0.792 vs. 0.783). We also report a small author-designed regression suite (FAMB; paraphrase n=10, other sub-tests n=1) at 100% macro -- internal validation, not peer benchmark. Strangers can verify the engine in under a minute via pip install "fluctlightdb[native]" and a minimal connect() -> experience() -> activate() script (compiled wheel, not source-only). Harnesses and frozen JSON are MIT-licensed. We claim no new neuroscience and no new transformer; we propose a missing layer of the data stack and release an engine others can reproduce and contest.

cs.DB

Hybrid Graphs for Table-and-Text based Question Answering using LLMs

Answering questions that require reasoning and aggregation across both structured (tables) and unstructured (raw text) data sources presents significant challenges. Current methods rely on fine-tuning and high-quality, human-curated data, which is difficult to obtain. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promising results for multi-hop question answering (QA) over single-source text data in a zero-shot setting, yet exploration into multi-source Table-Text QA remains limited. In this paper, we present a novel Hybrid Graph-based approach for Table-Text QA that leverages LLMs without fine-tuning. Our method constructs a unified Hybrid Graph from textual and tabular data, pruning information based on the input question to provide the LLM with relevant context concisely. We evaluate our approach on the challenging Hybrid-QA and OTT-QA datasets using state-of-the-art LLMs, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and LLaMA-3. Our method achieves the best zero-shot performance on both datasets, improving Exact Match scores by up to 10% on Hybrid-QA and 5.4% on OTT-QA. Moreover, our approach reduces token usage by up to 53% compared to the original context.

cs.CL