Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Agentic memory #5227

Open
wants to merge 83 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Agentic memory #5227

wants to merge 83 commits into from

Conversation

rickyloynd-microsoft
Copy link
Contributor

@rickyloynd-microsoft rickyloynd-microsoft commented Jan 28, 2025

Adds a baseline implementation of agentic memory to the autogen-ext package.

For technical details, see the Agentic Memory README.

To see it in action, view the page logs generated while running the code samples.

This PR is a draft pending a few remaining items in-progress:

  • Unit tests
  • Full documentation
  • Lint & format fixes
  • Potential usage of autogen-core/memory

Make memory optional.
Filter out insights with negative scores.
Refactor memory paths.
Enrich page logging.
Seed messages with random int for variability.
Save sessions as yaml for readability.
Eval simplifications.
@ekzhu
Copy link
Collaborator

ekzhu commented Jan 29, 2025

I haven't gone deep into the implementation logics, but I believe from just API level, we need to work on it to make sure it aligns with the rest of the framework. E.g., serializable configuration is already supported, and we should be using that. TaskRunner protocol is already there, and we should be using that. BaseChatAgent already provides an agent abstraction, and we should be using that as well.

Copy link
Member

@jackgerrits jackgerrits left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This PR is simply too large. Please propose your changes progressively and iteratively using a separate sequence of PRs. We cannot effectively review these changes as is.

@ekzhu
Copy link
Collaborator

ekzhu commented Jan 30, 2025

@jackgerrits we will be refactoring this in the current branch first

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants