211 lines
8.9 KiB
Markdown
211 lines
8.9 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
summary: "Research notes: offline memory system for Clawd workspaces (Markdown source-of-truth + derived index)"
|
||
read_when:
|
||
- Designing workspace memory (~/clawd) beyond daily Markdown logs
|
||
- Deciding: standalone CLI vs deep Clawdbot integration
|
||
- Adding offline recall + reflection (retain/recall/reflect)
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Workspace Memory v2 (offline): research notes
|
||
|
||
Target: Clawd-style workspace (`agent.workspace`, default `~/clawd`) where “memory” is stored as one Markdown file per day (`memory/YYYY-MM-DD.md`) plus a small set of stable files (e.g. `memory.md`, `SOUL.md`).
|
||
|
||
This doc proposes an **offline-first** memory architecture that keeps Markdown as the canonical, reviewable source of truth, but adds **structured recall** (search, entity summaries, confidence updates) via a derived index.
|
||
|
||
## Why change?
|
||
|
||
The current setup (one file per day) is excellent for:
|
||
- “append-only” journaling
|
||
- human editing
|
||
- git-backed durability + auditability
|
||
- low-friction capture (“just write it down”)
|
||
|
||
It’s weak for:
|
||
- high-recall retrieval (“what did we decide about X?”, “last time we tried Y?”)
|
||
- entity-centric answers (“tell me about Alice / The Castle / warelay”) without rereading many files
|
||
- opinion/preference stability (and evidence when it changes)
|
||
- time constraints (“what was true during Nov 2025?”) and conflict resolution
|
||
|
||
## Design goals
|
||
|
||
- **Offline**: works without network; can run on laptop/Castle; no cloud dependency.
|
||
- **Explainable**: retrieved items should be attributable (file + location) and separable from inference.
|
||
- **Low ceremony**: daily logging stays Markdown, no heavy schema work.
|
||
- **Incremental**: v1 is useful with FTS only; semantic/vector and graphs are optional upgrades.
|
||
- **Agent-friendly**: makes “recall within token budgets” easy (return small bundles of facts).
|
||
|
||
## North star model (Hindsight × Letta)
|
||
|
||
Two pieces to blend:
|
||
|
||
1) **Letta/MemGPT-style control loop**
|
||
- keep a small “core” always in context (persona + key user facts)
|
||
- everything else is out-of-context and retrieved via tools
|
||
- memory writes are explicit tool calls (append/replace/insert), persisted, then re-injected next turn
|
||
|
||
2) **Hindsight-style memory substrate**
|
||
- separate what’s observed vs what’s believed vs what’s summarized
|
||
- support retain/recall/reflect
|
||
- confidence-bearing opinions that can evolve with evidence
|
||
- entity-aware retrieval + temporal queries (even without full knowledge graphs)
|
||
|
||
## Proposed architecture (Markdown source-of-truth + derived index)
|
||
|
||
### Canonical store (git-friendly)
|
||
|
||
Keep `~/clawd` as canonical human-readable memory.
|
||
|
||
Suggested workspace layout:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
~/clawd/
|
||
memory.md # small: durable facts + preferences (core-ish)
|
||
memory/
|
||
YYYY-MM-DD.md # daily log (append; narrative)
|
||
bank/ # “typed” memory pages (stable, reviewable)
|
||
world.md # objective facts about the world
|
||
experience.md # what the agent did (first-person)
|
||
opinions.md # subjective prefs/judgments + confidence + evidence pointers
|
||
entities/
|
||
Peter.md
|
||
The-Castle.md
|
||
warelay.md
|
||
...
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
Notes:
|
||
- **Daily log stays daily log**. No need to turn it into JSON.
|
||
- The `bank/` files are **curated**, produced by reflection jobs, and can still be edited by hand.
|
||
- `memory.md` remains “small + core-ish”: the things you want Clawd to see every session.
|
||
|
||
### Derived store (machine recall)
|
||
|
||
Add a derived index under the workspace (not necessarily git tracked):
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
~/clawd/.memory/index.sqlite
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
Back it with:
|
||
- SQLite schema for facts + entity links + opinion metadata
|
||
- SQLite **FTS5** for lexical recall (fast, tiny, offline)
|
||
- optional embeddings table for semantic recall (still offline)
|
||
|
||
The index is always **rebuildable from Markdown**.
|
||
|
||
## Retain / Recall / Reflect (operational loop)
|
||
|
||
### Retain: normalize daily logs into “facts”
|
||
|
||
Hindsight’s key insight that matters here: store **narrative, self-contained facts**, not tiny snippets.
|
||
|
||
Practical rule for `memory/YYYY-MM-DD.md`:
|
||
- at end of day (or during), add a `## Retain` section with 2–5 bullets that are:
|
||
- narrative (cross-turn context preserved)
|
||
- self-contained (standalone makes sense later)
|
||
- tagged with type + entity mentions
|
||
|
||
Example:
|
||
|
||
```
|
||
## Retain
|
||
- W @Peter: Currently in Marrakech (Nov 27–Dec 1, 2025) for Andy’s birthday.
|
||
- B @warelay: I fixed the Baileys WS crash by wrapping connection.update handlers in try/catch (see memory/2025-11-27.md).
|
||
- O(c=0.95) @Peter: Prefers concise replies (<1500 chars) on WhatsApp; long content goes into files.
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
Minimal parsing:
|
||
- Type prefix: `W` (world), `B` (experience/biographical), `O` (opinion), `S` (observation/summary; usually generated)
|
||
- Entities: `@Peter`, `@warelay`, etc (slugs map to `bank/entities/*.md`)
|
||
- Opinion confidence: `O(c=0.0..1.0)` optional
|
||
|
||
If you don’t want authors to think about it: the reflect job can infer these bullets from the rest of the log, but having an explicit `## Retain` section is the easiest “quality lever”.
|
||
|
||
### Recall: queries over the derived index
|
||
|
||
Recall should support:
|
||
- **lexical**: “find exact terms / names / commands” (FTS5)
|
||
- **entity**: “tell me about X” (entity pages + entity-linked facts)
|
||
- **temporal**: “what happened around Nov 27” / “since last week”
|
||
- **opinion**: “what does Peter prefer?” (with confidence + evidence)
|
||
|
||
Return format should be agent-friendly and cite sources:
|
||
- `kind` (`world|experience|opinion|observation`)
|
||
- `timestamp` (source day, or extracted time range if present)
|
||
- `entities` (`["Peter","warelay"]`)
|
||
- `content` (the narrative fact)
|
||
- `source` (`memory/2025-11-27.md#L12` etc)
|
||
|
||
### Reflect: produce stable pages + update beliefs
|
||
|
||
Reflection is a scheduled job (daily or heartbeat `ultrathink`) that:
|
||
- updates `bank/entities/*.md` from recent facts (entity summaries)
|
||
- updates `bank/opinions.md` confidence based on reinforcement/contradiction
|
||
- optionally proposes edits to `memory.md` (“core-ish” durable facts)
|
||
|
||
Opinion evolution (simple, explainable):
|
||
- each opinion has:
|
||
- statement
|
||
- confidence `c ∈ [0,1]`
|
||
- last_updated
|
||
- evidence links (supporting + contradicting fact IDs)
|
||
- when new facts arrive:
|
||
- find candidate opinions by entity overlap + similarity (FTS first, embeddings later)
|
||
- update confidence by small deltas; big jumps require strong contradiction + repeated evidence
|
||
|
||
## CLI integration: standalone vs deep integration
|
||
|
||
Recommendation: **deep integration in Clawdbot**, but keep a separable core library.
|
||
|
||
### Why integrate into Clawdbot?
|
||
- Clawdbot already knows:
|
||
- the workspace path (`agent.workspace`)
|
||
- the session model + heartbeats
|
||
- logging + troubleshooting patterns
|
||
- You want the agent itself to call the tools:
|
||
- `clawdbot memory recall "…" --k 25 --since 30d`
|
||
- `clawdbot memory reflect --since 7d`
|
||
|
||
### Why still split a library?
|
||
- keep memory logic testable without gateway/runtime
|
||
- reuse from other contexts (local scripts, future desktop app, etc.)
|
||
|
||
Shape:
|
||
The memory tooling is intended to be a small CLI + library layer, but this is exploratory only.
|
||
|
||
## “S-Collide” / SuCo: when to use it (research)
|
||
|
||
If “S-Collide” refers to **SuCo (Subspace Collision)**: it’s an ANN retrieval approach that targets strong recall/latency tradeoffs by using learned/structured collisions in subspaces (paper: arXiv 2411.14754, 2024).
|
||
|
||
Pragmatic take for `~/clawd`:
|
||
- **don’t start** with SuCo.
|
||
- start with SQLite FTS + (optional) simple embeddings; you’ll get most UX wins immediately.
|
||
- consider SuCo/HNSW/ScaNN-class solutions only once:
|
||
- corpus is big (tens/hundreds of thousands of chunks)
|
||
- brute-force embedding search becomes too slow
|
||
- recall quality is meaningfully bottlenecked by lexical search
|
||
|
||
Offline-friendly alternatives (in increasing complexity):
|
||
- SQLite FTS5 + metadata filters (zero ML)
|
||
- Embeddings + brute force (works surprisingly far if chunk count is low)
|
||
- HNSW index (common, robust; needs a library binding)
|
||
- SuCo (research-grade; attractive if there’s a solid implementation you can embed)
|
||
|
||
Open question:
|
||
- what’s the **best** offline embedding model for “personal assistant memory” on your machines (MacBook + Castle)?
|
||
- if you already have Ollama: embed with a local model; otherwise ship a small embedding model in the toolchain.
|
||
|
||
## Smallest useful pilot
|
||
|
||
If you want a minimal, still-useful version:
|
||
|
||
- Add `bank/` entity pages and a `## Retain` section in daily logs.
|
||
- Use SQLite FTS for recall with citations (path + line numbers).
|
||
- Add embeddings only if recall quality or scale demands it.
|
||
|
||
## References
|
||
|
||
- Letta / MemGPT concepts: “core memory blocks” + “archival memory” + tool-driven self-editing memory.
|
||
- Hindsight Technical Report: “retain / recall / reflect”, four-network memory, narrative fact extraction, opinion confidence evolution.
|
||
- SuCo: arXiv 2411.14754 (2024): “Subspace Collision” approximate nearest neighbor retrieval.
|