LivingFeed

1. Executive Summary

LivingFeed is a multi-actor social simulation — actors with emotions, goals and relationships posting to a feed, driven by a tick loop and a director — in a pnpm monorepo with about 19,200 lines of Python in engine/ and 50,000 across the repository. MIT-licensed. Its documentation and code comments are in Korean, and the terms quoted below are the reviewer's translations with the originals given where they matter. It is the second such system in this atlas after GenericAgent, and like that one its design rules are numbered and cited.

The memory design is a three-layer fabric, and the layer boundaries are where the interesting decisions are:

• Working (memory.py, 44 lines) — a Redis list per (world_id, actor_id), six-hour TTL, capped at 50 entries, most-recent-first.
• Episodic — the event store itself. The schema for actor.memory.consolidated states it directly: "the event store is the permanent original of the Episodic layer".
• Semantic — Qdrant, embedded only when importance clears a gate, and documented as "forgetting happens only in Semantic; the original is not erased" (망각은 Semantic에서만 일어나고 원본은 남는다).

That last sentence is the atlas's second divergence — whether evidence outlives its derivations — written as a schema-level rule rather than discovered in the code. Forgetting is real and it is confined to the index.

The mechanism worth the visit is what consolidation stores about itself. Importance is 0.35·emotion + 0.30·relationship + 0.20·goal + 0.15·rarity, and the event carries not only the total but a required factors object holding all four components, described as "the material for coefficient tuning (offline replay evaluation)". This atlas has recorded the opposite twice: Generative Agents ships gw = [0.5, 3, 2] as hand-tuned constants with no committed ablation, and MemoryOS leaves its promotion coefficients at 1, 1 and 1 with nothing measuring them. LivingFeed is the first system here that stores the decomposition specifically so the weights can be re-derived from replay rather than defended.

source_event_ids is minItems: 1 — mandatory provenance from every memory back to the events that produced it, with the rule cited inline: "any memory is audit-traceable (ADR-008 rule 4)".

2. Mental Model

A perception enters working memory as a sentence. At tick end, consolidation folds the tick's material into one episode and scores it. Above the gate it is embedded into the semantic index with a decay_at; below it, it exists only as the event that produced it. Recall reads the semantic index, filtered to the actor and to points that have not yet expired.

So a memory's life is: event (permanent) → episode (permanent, in the event store) → semantic point (expiring). Nothing is ever updated and nothing is deleted; things stop being findable. There are no trust states and no corrections — an actor cannot be told it was wrong, only allowed to forget.

The forgetting curve is one line: decay_at = now + DECAY_MIN_S + (DECAY_MAX_S - DECAY_MIN_S) * importance, one day at importance zero and thirty at importance one. The importance score therefore does two jobs — it decides whether a memory is indexed at all, and how long it survives — and both are tunable from the stored factors.

One asymmetry is deliberate and documented: RECALL_MIN_IMPORTANCE = 0.3 sits below the consolidation gate of 0.4, so recall will return things the gate would not have admitted today. A threshold that moved should not orphan what it already wrote.

flowchart TB
    Perc["Perception this tick"] --> WM[("Working memory<br/>Redis list · 6h TTL · 50 entries")]
    WM -->|"tick end"| Cons["Consolidation<br/>importance = 0.35·emotion + 0.30·relationship<br/>+ 0.20·goal + 0.15·rarity"]
    Cons --> Ep[("Episodic = the event store<br/>PERMANENT ORIGINAL<br/>source_event_ids minItems 1")]
    Cons -->|"importance ≥ 0.4"| Sem[("Semantic · Qdrant<br/>decay_at = 1 day … 30 days")]
    Sem -->|"filter: actor_id, importance ≥ 0.3, decay_at > now"| Recall["Recall"]
    Sem -.->|"forgetting happens only here"| Gone["expires"]
    Ep -.->|"never erased"| Ep
    Cons -.->|"factors stored, not just the total"| Tune["material for offline<br/>coefficient tuning by replay"]

3. Architecture

Redis, Qdrant, an event store, and the tick services. engine/ splits into actor, director, emotion, feed, goal, relationship and tick; packages/ holds eventstore, schemas, api-client and ui, with JSON Schema as the source of truth and both Python and TypeScript types generated from it.

The embedding decision is an operational one worth naming. semantic.py uses a deterministic hash n-gram vector at 256 dimensions rather than a model, explicitly "so that real similarity search works in dev/CI and replays reproduce", with model embeddings deferred to a later provider stage behind the same interface. Several systems in this atlas cannot be tested without an API key; this one made the embedding substitutable so that the harness runs everywhere and the replay is deterministic.

4. Essential Implementation Paths

• engine/actor/src/lf_actor/phases.py (1,707) — the tick phases.
• engine/actor/src/lf_actor/consolidation.py — episode folding, action labels, perception sentences.
• engine/actor/src/lf_actor/semantic.py — embedding, decay_at, scoped recall.
• engine/actor/src/lf_actor/memory.py (44) — working memory.
• engine/actor/src/lf_actor/reflection.py (234) and relationship.py (307).
• packages/schemas/events/actor.memory.consolidated.schema.json — the unit.

5. Memory Data Model

The consolidated episode: summary (1–500 characters), importance (0–1), factors (emotion, relationship, goal, rarity — all four required, no additional properties), source_event_ids (at least one, ULID-patterned), and tags constrained to ^[a-z_]+$.

Two details show the same instinct. Actions are stored with a Korean label — work, rest, observe, speak, confront, confess, sever — because "we do not leave machine vocabulary in a diary", with the raw action_kind kept only as a tag for search and aggregation. And perception sentences name actors by name rather than id where names are available, so "a memory remains as a person, not an id". The unknown-kind path falls back to the raw string for forward compatibility, since action_kind is an open vocabulary in the schema.

There is no validity time — every timestamp is record time — and no status field.

6. Retrieval Mechanics

recall posts a vector search to lf_semantic_{world_id} with a must filter of three clauses: actor_id matches, importance >= min_importance, and decay_at > now. Scope is therefore enforced twice — a collection per world and a filter per actor — and expiry is a query predicate rather than a sweeper, so a forgotten memory needs no job to disappear.

Working memory is a plain LRANGE of the most recent entries.

There is no fusion, no lexical lane, no reranking, and no relevance measurement.

7. Write Mechanics

Consolidation runs at tick end and is synchronous with the tick, not with a user request. Summaries are template-first, with LLM summarisation reserved for high-importance episodes (ADR-008 rule 2) — so the common path costs nothing and the model is spent only where the score says it matters.

Nothing rewrites the store. The semantic index gains points and lets them expire; the event store only appends.

8. Agent Integration

Memory is internal to the actor service. There is no external memory API, no MCP surface and no tool the actors call — remembering is something the tick does to them, which is the Generative Agents lineage rather than the tool-calling one.

9. Reliability, Safety, and Trust

scope_enforced is earned on the read path twice over, as above.

No tombstone, no trust state, no bi-temporality, no human review. The design has no concept of a memory being wrong — only of it mattering less, which is a coherent position for a simulation and would not be for an assistant.

No audit-log mark, and the near-miss is unusual. Every consolidated memory carries mandatory source_event_ids back to the events that produced it, and the event store is append-only — so provenance is complete in the direction that matters for rebuilding. What is absent is a record of memory mutations, because there are none: nothing is ever updated or deleted, so there is nothing for a mutation log to hold. The column is withheld on a technicality that is really a design property.

The risk is a swallowed failure. recall wraps its Qdrant call in a bare except Exception, logs "recall failed (bypassing with empty recall)" (회상 실패(빈 회상으로 우회)), and returns []. An unreachable or misconfigured index therefore produces an actor with no memories rather than an error, and the tick continues. In a simulation that degrades gracefully; it also means a total memory outage looks exactly like a world where nothing memorable happened, and nothing upstream distinguishes them.

10. Tests, Evals, and Benchmarks

429 test functions across 40 files under engine/, none run here, including test_memory_integration.py, test_semantic.py, test_phases.py and integration suites for emotion, goal and relationship. That the deterministic embedder makes real similarity assertions possible in CI is what lets those tests be about behaviour rather than about mocks.

No negative retrieval assertion was found, and no memory benchmark or retrieval-quality measurement exists. The importance coefficients are declared as configuration to be tuned by offline replay evaluation; no such evaluation is committed, so the apparatus for the tuning is present and the tuning is not — which is a much better position than the systems that hard-code the weights, and still short of the ablation the design describes.

11. For Your Own Build

Steal

• Store the components of a composite score, not just the total. Four floats per memory turns "why is this weighted 0.35" from an argument into a regression you can run over replayed history. This is the cheapest answer to the hand-tuned-constants problem that runs through this whole atlas.
• Confine forgetting to the derived layer. Expiry on the index, permanence in the event store, stated as a rule rather than left to be inferred. Recall gets narrower and nothing is destroyed.
• Make expiry a query predicate. decay_at > now in the filter needs no sweeper, no job, and no window where an expired memory is still returned.
• Set the recall floor below the write gate. A threshold you raise later should not strand what it already admitted.
• Use a deterministic embedder in dev and CI. Hash n-grams give you real similarity search with no key and reproducible replays, behind the interface the real model will use.
• Write the human label, keep the machine one as a tag. A memory that reads as a diary entry and carries action_kind for aggregation serves both readers.

Avoid

• Returning [] on a retrieval failure. An amnesiac actor and a quiet world are indistinguishable to everything upstream. Degrade if you must, but say so in a signal something can count.
• A memory model with no way to be wrong. Correct for a simulation, and the first thing to add if these actors ever talk to a real user about facts.

Fit

Read this if you are building a simulation, a companion, or anything where memory should fade rather than be corrected — it is the most carefully reasoned member of the Generative Agents lineage in this atlas, and the ADR-numbered rules cited from the code make the design legible in a way the original's hand-tuned constants are not.

Do not take it as a factual memory layer. There is no correction path, no trust state and no deletion by identity, and the Korean-language documentation means the design rationale is only partly accessible to a non-Korean-reading team — the code is legible, the reasons are in the comments.

12. Open Questions

• Has the replay tuning ever been run? The factors are stored for it and no evaluation is committed. It is the one measurable claim this design makes.
• What is the recall failure rate in practice? The swallowed exception means the answer is a log line rather than a metric.
• How do the two thresholds interact over a long world? A 0.4 write gate and a 0.3 recall floor with a one-to-thirty-day decay curve implies a steady-state index size nobody has computed here.
• Do the relationship and reflection modules write memory? Both were read only far enough to place them; neither was traced into the memory path.

Appendix: File Index