Retrieval & memory
Giving private AI memory a source of authority
Private memory needs more than search. A retrieved statement must carry its source, date, authority, and conflict status.
The question
How can a private memory system retrieve history without stale summaries overriding approved current facts?
How the work was approached
Compared architecture reviews and issued a targeted follow-up to resolve source-wide authority weighting.
What the record shows
The design resolved authority per claim/domain using effective date, approval, evidence type, verification and conflict state; proposed immutable sources and privacy filtering before retrieval.
What remains unresolved
No source export, index, embeddings, service or retrieval benchmark was implemented by this inquiry. The local combined file is a collection/status note, not full verbatim provider answers; it says verbatim captures remained in browser sessions.
What we are trying to achieve
The aim is durable private knowledge that can help across sessions while retaining the original evidence. A future implementation should recognize newer decisions, source conflicts, and privacy boundaries before using a memory to support an answer.
Sources & reading notes
- consolidated_report.mdPractical Conclusion / Claim Precedence / Future Pilot Retained project record Source record retained privately.
- discussion_notes.mdActual Follow-up Cycle / Conflict Resolved Retained project record Source record retained privately.
- combined_full_text.txtProvider response preservation note Retained project record Source record retained privately.
This is a dated, source-based research account, not a live machine report. Historical results, engineering preparation, research designs, open review gates, and measured pilots remain distinct.