emotional-memory 0.11.2

Emotional memory library for LLMs based on Affective Field Theory

emotional_memory

Emotional memory for LLMs based on Affective Field Theory (AFT) — a 5-layer model that encodes not just what happened, but how it felt, how that feeling was moving, and what mood colored the moment.

Pre-registered evaluation on realistic_recall_v2: English (N=200, SBERT Δ=+0.21, d=0.49) and French (N=120, me5, Δ=+0.18, p<0.0001, Hedges g=0.42 — Addendum M Branch A PASS). Italian/Spanish me5 at declared power (N=120) FAIL; English-SBERT and SBERT-Spanish (N=80) hold. External-QA evaluation (LoCoMo) and naturalistic dialogue (DailyDialog) FAIL — the AFT advantage is regime-specific to affect-discriminative recall, not general superiority. Full claim-validation matrix.

Why emotional_memory?

Most LLM memory libraries treat retrieval as semantic-only: vector similarity over text. Real human recall is driven by more:

• Affective congruence — we remember things that feel like how we feel now (Bower 1981)
• Arousal-modulated consolidation — emotionally-charged events consolidate more strongly (Cahill & McGaugh 1995; ACT-R power-law with arousal floor, McGaugh 2004)
• Reconsolidation — retrieved memories become labile and update with prediction error (Nader & Schiller 2000; APE-gated lability window)
• Dual-path encoding — fast affective signal precedes slow appraisal (LeDoux 1996)
• 3D affect — perceived control (dominance) discriminates fear from anger (Mehrabian & Russell 1974; PAD)

emotional_memory operationalizes these as a single retrieval pipeline. Validated against 20 published psychological phenomena (126 fidelity tests) and 12+ pre-registered confirmatory studies — including committed negative results.

How it compares

Library	Memory model	Affective retrieval	Reconsolidation	Decay model	Psychological fidelity tests
emotional_memory	5-layer AFT (semantic + valence/arousal + momentum + mood + appraisal)	✅ mood-congruent + APE-gated	✅ Nader & Schiller 2000	ACT-R power-law + arousal modulation	126 tests, 20 phenomena
MemGPT / Letta	Hierarchical context (working + archival)	❌	❌	None	—
mem0	Fact extraction + vector store	❌	❌	None	—
A-MEM	Atomic notes + dynamic links	❌	❌	None	—
LangMem	Hot/cold memory tiers	❌	❌	Time-based eviction	—
Generative Agents (Park et al.)	Importance + recency + relevance	Partial (importance only)	❌	Exponential	—

This is not a replacement for those tools — emotional_memory is a focused primitive that can plug into any of them via the MemoryStore protocol (LangChain adapter included).

30-second example

from emotional_memory import EmotionalMemory, InMemoryStore, CoreAffect

em = EmotionalMemory(store=InMemoryStore(), embedder=MyEmbedder())

em.set_affect(CoreAffect(valence=-0.6, arousal=0.7))   # stressed
em.encode("The deployment failed at 3am.")
em.encode("Beautiful sunset on the lake.")

em.set_affect(CoreAffect(valence=-0.5, arousal=0.6))   # similar mood later
results = em.retrieve("yesterday", top_k=2)
# → deployment memory ranks higher than sunset, even with equal semantic distance.

Installation

uv pip install emotional-memory
uv pip install "emotional-memory[sentence-transformers]"  # real semantic embeddings (recommended)
uv pip install "emotional-memory[sqlite]"                 # SQLite persistence via sqlite-vec
uv pip install "emotional-memory[qdrant]"                 # Qdrant vector database
uv pip install "emotional-memory[chroma]"                 # ChromaDB vector database
uv pip install "emotional-memory[otel]"                   # OpenTelemetry tracing (no-op without this extra)
uv pip install "emotional-memory[redis]"                  # shared affective-state persistence via Redis
uv pip install "emotional-memory[viz]"                    # matplotlib visualization
uv pip install "emotional-memory[dotenv]"                 # .env file loading via python-dotenv

For development:

git clone https://github.com/gianlucamazza/emotional-memory
cd emotional-memory
make install
# optional local demo stack:
make install-demo

Quickstart

uv pip install "emotional-memory[sentence-transformers]"

from emotional_memory import EmotionalMemory, InMemoryStore, CoreAffect
from emotional_memory.embedders import SentenceTransformerEmbedder

em = EmotionalMemory(
    store=InMemoryStore(),
    embedder=SentenceTransformerEmbedder(),  # all-MiniLM-L6-v2 by default
)

# Set current emotional state
em.set_affect(CoreAffect(valence=0.8, arousal=0.6))

# Encode memories — each one captures the full affective context
em.encode("Just shipped the feature after three hard weeks.")
em.encode("Team celebration in the office.", metadata={"source": "slack"})

# Retrieve — ranked by semantic relevance AND emotional congruence
results = em.retrieve("difficult project success", top_k=3)
for mem in results:
    print(mem.content, mem.tag.core_affect)

# Or inspect why a memory ranked where it did
explained = em.retrieve_with_explanations("difficult project success", top_k=1)
top = explained[0]
print(top.score)
print(top.breakdown.raw_signals)

Bring your own embedder — any object with .embed(text) -> list[float] works:

class MyEmbedder:
    def embed(self, text: str) -> list[float]: ...
    def embed_batch(self, texts: list[str]) -> list[list[float]]: ...

Or subclass SequentialEmbedder and implement only embed() — embed_batch() is provided.

Async

import asyncio
from emotional_memory import EmotionalMemory, InMemoryStore, as_async
from emotional_memory.embedders import SentenceTransformerEmbedder

sync_em = EmotionalMemory(store=InMemoryStore(), embedder=SentenceTransformerEmbedder())
em = as_async(sync_em)  # wraps sync components with asyncio.to_thread bridges

async def main():
    await em.encode("Meeting went surprisingly well today.")
    results = await em.retrieve("work meeting", top_k=3)

asyncio.run(main())

For native async embedders or stores, construct AsyncEmotionalMemory directly with SyncToAsyncEmbedder, SyncToAsyncStore, or your own AsyncEmbedder/AsyncMemoryStore.

Affective Field Theory

AFT models emotion as a field — distributed, dynamic, multi-layer — rather than a discrete label or a single coordinate. Five layers are captured at encoding time:

Layer	Model	What it captures
CoreAffect	Russell-Mehrabian PAD model	Continuous (valence, arousal, dominance) — the emotional substrate
AffectiveMomentum	Spinoza — affect as transition	Velocity and acceleration of affect change
MoodField	Heidegger — Stimmung as attunement	Slow-moving global mood with inertia (EMA)
AppraisalVector	Scherer/Lazarus/Stoics	Emotion derived from evaluation: novelty, goal-relevance, coping, norm-congruence, self-relevance
ResonanceLinks	Aristotle/Hume/Bower/Collins & Loftus/Hebb	Associative bidirectional graph: semantic, emotional, temporal, causal, contrastive links; multi-hop spreading activation + Hebbian co-retrieval strengthening

Full theoretical foundations: docs/research/

API Overview

EmotionalMemory

em = EmotionalMemory(
    store: MemoryStore,
    embedder: Embedder,
    appraisal_engine: AppraisalEngine | None = None,  # optional: auto-appraise via LLM
    config: EmotionalMemoryConfig | None = None,
    state_store: AffectiveStateStore | None = None,   # optional: persist affective state
)

Method	Description
encode(content, appraisal=None, metadata=None) -> Memory	Encode content with full AFT pipeline
observe(content, appraisal=None, metadata=None) -> EmotionalTag	Update affective state without storing a retrievable memory
encode_batch(contents, metadata=None) -> list[Memory]	Batch encode with embed_batch(), per-item appraisal
retrieve(query, top_k=5) -> list[Memory]	Emotionally-weighted retrieval + reconsolidation
retrieve_with_explanations(query, top_k=5) -> list[RetrievalExplanation]	Same retrieval pipeline plus a structured score breakdown
elaborate(memory_id) -> Memory | None	Run full appraisal on a fast-path (pending_appraisal=True) memory and blend core_affect
elaborate_pending() -> list[Memory]	Elaborate all pending fast-path memories in one call
delete(memory_id)	Remove a memory from the store
get(memory_id) -> Memory | None	Look up a single memory by ID
list_all() -> list[Memory]	Return all stored memories
len(engine) -> int	Number of memories in the store
prune(threshold=0.05) -> int	Delete memories below effective strength threshold; returns count removed
export_memories() -> list[dict]	Serialise all memories to JSON-safe dicts (backup / migration)
import_memories(data, overwrite=False) -> int	Restore from export_memories() output; returns count written
get_state() -> AffectiveState	Current affective state (read-only copy)
set_affect(core_affect)	Manually inject a CoreAffect
reset_state()	Reset runtime affective state to the initial baseline
save_state() -> dict	Serialise affective state for persistence
load_state(data)	Restore previously saved affective state
persist_state() -> dict	Persist the current affective state to the configured state store
restore_persisted_state() -> bool	Restore the last persisted affective state from the configured state store
clear_persisted_state()	Clear the configured persisted affective-state snapshot
get_current_mood(now=None) -> MoodField	Read-only mood with time regression
close()	Release store resources (e.g. SQLite connection); also via with

Both engines support context managers for automatic resource cleanup:

with EmotionalMemory(store=SQLiteStore("mem.db"), embedder=MyEmbedder()) as em:
    em.encode("Session start")
    results = em.retrieve("relevant context")
# SQLiteStore.close() called automatically

Use retrieve() for normal recall paths. Use retrieve_with_explanations() when you need the ranking-time decomposition (semantic, mood, affect, momentum, recency, resonance) for debugging, evaluation, or UI inspection.

AsyncEmotionalMemory

Same method signatures as EmotionalMemory. Coroutines: encode, observe, encode_batch, retrieve, retrieve_with_explanations, elaborate, elaborate_pending, delete, get, list_all, count, prune, export_memories, import_memories, persist_state, restore_persisted_state, clear_persisted_state, close. State accessors (get_state, set_affect, reset_state, save_state, load_state, get_current_mood) remain synchronous.

Supports async with for automatic resource cleanup:

async with AsyncEmotionalMemory(store=..., embedder=...) as em:
    await em.encode("Session start")
    results = await em.retrieve("relevant context")

from emotional_memory import AsyncEmotionalMemory, SyncToAsyncEmbedder, SyncToAsyncStore

Bridge adapters: SyncToAsyncEmbedder, SyncToAsyncStore, SyncToAsyncAppraisalEngine wrap any sync implementation. SyncToAsyncStore also proxies close() to the underlying store. as_async(engine) wraps a complete EmotionalMemory in one call.

Key config classes

• EmotionalMemoryConfig — top-level config (nested configs below + top-level flags):
  • dual_path_encoding: bool = False — LeDoux 1996 fast/slow path (encode first, elaborate later)
  • elaboration_learning_rate: float = 0.7 — blend ratio when elaborate() runs full appraisal (70% appraised / 30% raw)
  • auto_categorize: bool = False — run Plutchik categorization on every encode
  • enable_appraisal: bool = True — use appraisal engine if configured (ablation flag)
  • enable_mood_signal: bool = True — include mood-congruence in retrieval scoring (ablation flag)
  • enable_momentum: bool = True — include momentum alignment in retrieval scoring (ablation flag)
  • enable_resonance: bool = True — build and use resonance graph (ablation flag)
  • enable_reconsolidation: bool = True — APE-gated reconsolidation on retrieve (ablation flag)
• RetrievalConfig — weights, APE threshold, reconsolidation learning rate
• ResonanceConfig — similarity threshold, max links, semantic/emotional/temporal weights, candidate multiplier, propagation_hops, hebbian_increment, configurable link-classification thresholds
• DecayConfig — power-law decay parameters, arousal modulation, floor values
• MoodDecayConfig — time-based mood regression (half-life, inertia scale, baselines)
• AdaptiveWeightsConfig — smooth mood-adaptive retrieval weight tuning (sigmoid/Gaussian gates)
• LLMAppraisalConfig — LLM appraisal engine settings (system prompt, cache size, fallback behaviour, appraisal_schema)
• QueryClassifierConfig — query-type routing mode (heuristic / llm) + per-type weight override table

Query routing

EmotionalMemory supports per-query-type adaptive weights via a pluggable classifier. The built-in HeuristicQueryClassifier uses keyword patterns to detect temporal, multi-hop, single-hop and open-domain questions and selects a matching weight profile from a routing table:

from emotional_memory import (
    EmotionalMemory, EmotionalMemoryConfig,
    HeuristicQueryClassifier, LOCOMO_ROUTING,
    InMemoryStore,
)
from emotional_memory.retrieval import QueryClassifierConfig, RetrievalConfig

em = EmotionalMemory(
    store=InMemoryStore(),
    embedder=my_embedder,
    config=EmotionalMemoryConfig(
        retrieval=RetrievalConfig(
            query_classifier=QueryClassifierConfig(
                mode="heuristic",
                routed_weights=LOCOMO_ROUTING,
            )
        )
    ),
    query_classifier=HeuristicQueryClassifier(),
)
# retrieve now selects weights based on detected query type
results = em.retrieve("When did Alice first mention the project?")

LOCOMO_ROUTING is the pre-built routing table derived from the Addendum J Pareto sweep. For LLM-backed classification use LLMQueryClassifier with the same QueryClassifierConfig.

Interfaces (bring your own)

If your embedder has no native batching, subclass SequentialEmbedder — embed_batch() is provided automatically:

from emotional_memory import SequentialEmbedder

class MyEmbedder(SequentialEmbedder):
    def embed(self, text: str) -> list[float]:
        return my_model.encode(text).tolist()

Otherwise implement the full Embedder protocol:

class Embedder(Protocol):
    def embed(self, text: str) -> list[float]: ...
    def embed_batch(self, texts: list[str]) -> list[list[float]]: ...

class MemoryStore(Protocol):
    def save(self, memory: Memory) -> None: ...
    def get(self, memory_id: str) -> Memory | None: ...
    def update(self, memory: Memory) -> None: ...
    def delete(self, memory_id: str) -> None: ...
    def list_all(self) -> list[Memory]: ...
    def search_by_embedding(self, embedding: list[float], top_k: int) -> list[Memory]: ...
    def __len__(self) -> int: ...

class AffectiveStateStore(Protocol):
    def save(self, state: AffectiveState) -> None: ...
    def load(self) -> AffectiveState | None: ...
    def clear(self) -> None: ...

Async variants (AsyncEmbedder, AsyncMemoryStore, AsyncAppraisalEngine) are defined in interfaces_async.py. AsyncMemoryStore uses count() -> int instead of __len__ since dunder methods cannot be coroutines.

Stores included:

• InMemoryStore — dict-backed, brute-force cosine search (no extra deps)
• SQLiteStore — persistent SQLite + sqlite-vec ANN search (uv pip install "emotional-memory[sqlite]")
• QdrantStore — Qdrant vector database, embedded or server mode (uv pip install "emotional-memory[qdrant]")
• ChromaStore — ChromaDB vector database, ephemeral or persistent (uv pip install "emotional-memory[chroma]")

Affective-state stores included (persist the runtime mood/momentum state across sessions):

• InMemoryAffectiveStateStore — in-process only, no extra deps
• SQLiteAffectiveStateStore — durable across restarts ([sqlite] extra)
• RedisAffectiveStateStore — shared across processes/services ([redis] extra)

Pass one as state_store= to EmotionalMemory(...) to enable cross-session mood continuity.

Appraisal Engines

class AppraisalEngine(Protocol):
    def appraise(self, event_text: str, context: dict | None = None) -> AppraisalVector: ...

Pass an appraisal_engine to EmotionalMemory to auto-generate AppraisalVector during encode.

LLMAppraisalEngine — wrap any LLM SDK in a single callable:

from emotional_memory import LLMAppraisalEngine

def my_llm(prompt: str, json_schema: dict) -> str:
    # call openai / anthropic / local model here
    return response_text

engine = LLMAppraisalEngine(llm=my_llm)
em = EmotionalMemory(store=..., embedder=..., appraisal_engine=engine)

KeywordAppraisalEngine — regex-based fallback, zero external dependencies, ships with default rules covering success, failure, novelty, danger, and social norms:

from emotional_memory import KeywordAppraisalEngine
engine = KeywordAppraisalEngine()  # or pass custom KeywordRule list

BYO appraisal schema (AppraisalSchema) — swap the default Scherer CPM prompt for any appraisal taxonomy (OCC, GRID, or custom) without forking the library:

from emotional_memory import LLMAppraisalEngine, LLMAppraisalConfig, AppraisalSchema
from emotional_memory.appraisal_schema import AppraisalDimension

my_schema = AppraisalSchema(
    name="occ",
    dimensions=[
        AppraisalDimension(name="desirability", range=(-1.0, 1.0), description="…"),
        AppraisalDimension(name="likelihood",   range=( 0.0, 1.0), description="…"),
    ],
)
config = LLMAppraisalConfig(appraisal_schema=my_schema)
engine = LLMAppraisalEngine(llm=my_llm, config=config)

The engine validates AppraisalVector outputs against the declared schema dimensions. SCHERER_CPM_SCHEMA (the 5-dimension default) is exported from emotional_memory directly.

Visualization

The optional viz extra provides 8 plotting functions for inspecting and presenting the model's internals. Each function accepts an optional ax parameter for subplot composition and returns a matplotlib.Figure.

from emotional_memory.visualization import plot_circumplex, plot_decay_curves

Valence-Arousal Circumplex

Memories plotted on the Russell-Mehrabian PAD model (valence-arousal plane), colored by consolidation strength.

Decay Curves (ACT-R Power Law)

Family of curves showing how arousal (McGaugh 2004) and retrieval count (spacing effect) modulate memory decay.

Yerkes-Dodson Inverted-U

Consolidation strength peaks near effective arousal 0.7, then drops — the classic Yerkes-Dodson curve.

6-Signal Retrieval Breakdown

Radar chart of the six retrieval signals: semantic similarity, mood congruence, affect proximity, momentum alignment, recency, and resonance boost.

Mood Field Evolution

Time series of valence, arousal, and dominance with dashed baselines showing the regression attractors.

Adaptive Retrieval Weights

Heatmap showing how retrieval weights shift across different mood states (valence x arousal grid).

Resonance Network

Directed graph with memories as nodes and edges colored by link type (semantic, emotional, temporal, causal, contrastive).

Appraisal Radar (Scherer CPM)

Spider chart of the 5 Stimulus Evaluation Check dimensions.

Generating images

make docs-images   # regenerate all PNGs in docs/images/
make research-figures   # regenerate benchmark evidence figures

Evidence Figures

The research figures below are generated from committed benchmark JSON artefacts, not from rerunning long studies.

Comparison with Existing Systems

	emotional-memory (AFT)	Mem0	Letta	Zep	LangChain Memory
License	MIT	Apache 2.0	Apache 2.0	Apache 2.0	MIT
Persistence	InMemory / SQLite / Qdrant / Chroma	Qdrant, Chroma, Pinecone, PG, MongoDB	PostgreSQL / SQLite	Neo4j (self-hosted) / Cloud	In-memory / custom
BYO embedder	✅ any Embedder protocol	✅ (OpenAI default)	⚠️ partial	⚠️ partial	✅
Emotion model	✅ 5-layer AFT (valence, arousal, dominance, mood, appraisal, resonance)	❌	❌	❌	❌
Reconsolidation	✅ APE-gated lability window	✅ auto update/remove	✅ tool-call edit	✅ edge invalidation	❌
Persistent mood state	✅ MoodField (Heidegger EMA)	❌	❌	❌	❌
LLM-agnostic	✅	✅	✅	✅	✅
LangChain integration	✅ EmotionalMemoryChatHistory	✅ official	✅ tools interop	✅ ZepVectorStore	✅ native
Internal fidelity tests	✅ 126 cases, 20 phenomena (bench-fidelity)	—	—	—	—
External benchmark	✅ LoCoMo (FAIL: F1 0.168 vs 0.271; Pareto Hj1 FAIL)	✅ LoCoMo, LongMemEval, BEAM	✅ LoCoMo, DMR	✅ DMR, LongMemEval	❌
Codebase size	~4.8k LOC (src/)	>50k LOC	>50k LOC	>50k LOC	~5k LOC

Key differentiator: emotional-memory makes affect a first-class, multi-layer part of encoding and retrieval. Compared with the general-purpose memory systems in this table, it emphasizes mood-congruent retrieval, appraisal-conditioned tagging, and APE-gated reconsolidation rather than generic conversational recall alone.

Benchmark caveat: AFT fidelity tests validate psychological invariants (intra-theory). The comparative benchmark in this repo is a controlled synthetic retrieval probe, not a general downstream evaluation of production memory systems.

Current validation status

Methodological boundary: results labelled A) below inject preset valence/arousal values at encode time (oracle affect). The LLM/keyword appraisal pipeline is bypassed. Results labelled B) ran without oracle affect — either naturalistic or appraisal-driven. These two regimes measure different things; they should not be conflated. The field requires_oracle_affect in docs/research/claim_validation_matrix.json encodes this boundary machine-readably for every claim.

A) Synthetic affect-controlled benchmarks (oracle affect provided)

• Theory fidelity — 126 fidelity test cases across 20 phenomena: the implementation behaves coherently with the theories it operationalizes. Phenomena include mood-congruent recall (Bower 1981), arousal floor (McGaugh 2004), ACT-R power-law decay, Hebbian strengthening, spacing effect, spreading activation, and more.
• Realistic multi-session replay (v2, N=200): AFT outperforms naive_cosine on both embedder classes: SBERT bge-small-en-v1.5 — top1 0.53 vs 0.33, Δ=+0.21 [0.15,0.27], p<0.001, d=0.49; e5-small-v2 — top1 0.50 vs 0.34, Δ=+0.16 [0.09,0.22], p<0.001, d=0.31. Architecture attribution confirmed (appraisal confound ruled out, Gate 3 CLOSED).
• SOTA comparison (v2, N=200, gpt-4.1-mini): AFT top1=0.535 vs Mem0=0.330, LangMem=0.365, naive_cosine=0.325. Δ vs cosine: +0.210 [+0.155,+0.270], p<0.001, d=0.512; non-overlapping CIs. Neither Mem0 nor LangMem beats cosine on this benchmark. Asymmetry: Mem0 outperforms AFT on the simpler affect_reference_v1 probe (recall@5=1.00 vs 0.85) at 25× higher latency.
• Italian multilingual slice (G6, 20 scenarios / 80 queries): SBERT: AFT hit@k=0.34, naive_cosine=0.19, Δ=+0.15 [p=0.0005]. me5: AFT hit@k=0.42, naive_cosine=0.26, Δ=+0.16 [p=0.001]. Spanish-SBERT (N=80 exploratory): Δ=+0.138 [p=0.045]. me5 runs at N=120 (declared power) FAIL for both languages (Branch C closure 2026-05-07).
• French multilingual slice (Addendum M, Branch A PASS, 2026-05-16): 30 native-FR hand-authored scenarios, 120 queries, me5, 2-session design. AFT top1=0.31 vs naive_cosine=0.12, Δ=+0.18 [0.11, 0.26], p<0.0001, Hedges g=0.424. Prior expectation: FAIL. cross_domain_affect_replication → controlled_evidence. Closes WS3b. See benchmarks/preregistration_addendum_m_fr_closure.md.
• Resonance amplification Hi3 (N=500): e5-small-v2 shows larger resonance interference than SBERT on semantic_confound queries (Δ=+0.090, d=0.257, Holm-adj p=0.023 — PASS) and recency_confound (Δ=+0.070, p=0.023 — PASS). Hi3_arc FAIL (Δ=+0.010, p=0.38).

B) End-to-end naturalistic benchmarks (no oracle affect)

• LLM appraisal end-to-end (Hg1 — FAIL, falsified): with LLMAppraisalEngine (gpt-5-mini) and no preset affect, AFT dual-path top1=0.315 vs naive_cosine=0.325 (Δ=−0.010, p=0.367). Synchronous appraisal is actively harmful: aft_llm_sync=0.130 vs aft_neutral=0.315 (−18.5 pp). The oracle-affect advantage does not transfer to automatic appraisal under this protocol.
• LoCoMo external QA benchmark (Gate 1 FAIL): on LoCoMo (1986 QA pairs, 10 conversations), AFT F1=0.168 vs naive_rag=0.271 (−10.3 pp). Affective weighting does not improve factual open-domain QA. Add. J Pareto sweep (10 weight configs × 200-QA) confirms the gap is not closable via base_weights tuning (Hj1 FAIL).
• DailyDialog ecological replication (Hk1 — FAIL): N=120 synthetic personas, 396 queries, multilingual-e5-small. AFT top1=0.212 vs naive_cosine=0.220 (Δ=−0.008, p_holm=1.000, d=−0.015). Only affective_trajectory queries show an underpowered positive trend (Δ=+0.103, d=0.186, N=39). Naturalistic short-turn dialogue does not show the AFT advantage; the 2-session realistic replay format does (FR PASS above).
• Query-type routing (Addendum L — FAIL, 2026-05-19): closed-loop heuristic routing (HeuristicQueryClassifier + LOCOMO_ROUTING) does not improve aggregate F1 over fixed W2 weights on 200-QA LoCoMo (Δ=−0.017, below +0.02 practical threshold) and does not close the gap vs naive_rag (Δ=−0.081). Per-query-type weight routing is shipped as an optional feature, not a default. See benchmarks/preregistration_addendum_l_query_routing_closure.md.
• Human / ecological validation: not yet established. Kit ready at benchmarks/human_eval/; zero ratings collected.

See Current Evidence for the study ladder and the current claim-to-evidence matrix. The canonical machine-readable source for those public scientific claims lives in docs/research/claim_validation_matrix.json.

Benchmarks

Psychological fidelity (126 parametrized test cases, 20 phenomena)

The library validates 20 phenomena from the affective science literature via 126 parametrized test cases (run pytest --collect-only benchmarks/fidelity/ to enumerate them):

Phenomenon	Reference	Cases	Test file
Mood-congruent recall	Bower 1981	3	test_mood_congruent.py
Emotional enhancement	Cahill & McGaugh 1995	3	test_emotional_enhancement.py
Yerkes-Dodson inverted-U	Yerkes & Dodson 1908	12	test_yerkes_dodson.py
Spacing effect	Ebbinghaus 1885	7	test_spacing_effect.py
Arousal floor	McGaugh 2004	7	test_arousal_floor.py
Reconsolidation (APE)	Nader & Schiller 2000	5	test_reconsolidation.py
State-dependent retrieval	Godden & Baddeley 1975	3	test_state_dependent.py
Affective momentum	Spinoza, Ethics III	9	test_momentum.py
Mood-adaptive weights	Heidegger, Being & Time §29	14	test_mood_adaptive.py
Appraisal-to-affect mapping	Scherer CPM 2009	11	test_appraisal_affect.py
Spreading activation	Collins & Loftus 1975	5	test_spreading_activation.py
Hebbian co-retrieval strengthening	Hebb 1949	4	test_hebbian_strengthening.py
ACT-R power-law decay	Anderson 1983 / McGaugh 2004	5	test_decay_power_law.py
PAD dominance	Mehrabian & Russell 1974	8	test_pad_dominance.py
Emotional retrieval vs. cosine	Bower 1981 / Russell 1980 / Nader 2000	3	test_emotional_vs_cosine.py
Design gap regression	(various)	3	test_design_gaps.py
Dual-path encoding	LeDoux 1996	6	test_dual_path_encoding.py
Emotion categorization	Plutchik 1980	10	test_emotion_categorization.py
Affective prediction error	Schultz 1997 / Pearce-Hall 1980	5	test_prediction_error.py
APE-gated reconsolidation window	Nader & Schiller 2000	3	test_reconsolidation_window.py

Run with: make bench-fidelity

For the comparative protocol and interpretation rules, see benchmarks/comparative/protocol.md.

Performance (hash-based embedder, InMemoryStore)

Operation	N	Mean	OPS
Encode (single)	1	1.7 ms	590/s
Encode (batch of 100)	100	9.9 ms/op	101/s
Encode w/ resonance graph	500	4.0 ms	250/s
Retrieve top-5	100	~2 ms	~500/s
Retrieve top-5	1 000	~12 ms	~85/s
Retrieve top-5	10 000	~120 ms	~8/s
Retrieve (top-k 1–25)	1 000	10–18 ms	55–100/s
Retrieve + reconsolidation	200	2.6 ms	385/s

InMemoryStore.search_by_embedding uses vectorized matrix multiplication (numpy), making retrieval O(n · d) in a single batch rather than n individual cosine calls. Retrieval uses two-pass scoring (spreading activation); when no resonance links are active the second pass is skipped. For stores > 10 000 memories, use SQLiteStore (sqlite-vec ANN) or a vector database implementing the MemoryStore protocol.

Run with: make bench-perf

Appraisal quality (LLM prompt validation)

15 natural-language phrases with expected directional outcomes against Scherer's 5 dimensions:

Phrase category	Key assertions
Personal loss ("I got fired")	goal_relevance < -0.2, coping_potential < 0.6
Achievement ("Got promoted")	goal_relevance > 0.2, norm_congruence > 0.0
Moral violation ("Coworker stole credit")	norm_congruence < -0.2, goal_relevance < 0.0
Grief, danger, betrayal, relief, …	dimension-specific directional bounds

Assertions use wide bands (e.g. > 0.3, < -0.2) and evaluate the median over 3 LLM calls to tolerate non-determinism. Designed to catch systematic prompt regressions, not exact calibration.

Run with: EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_API_KEY=... make bench-appraisal

Works with any OpenAI-compatible endpoint (Ollama, vLLM, LiteLLM, …) via EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_BASE_URL.

Production readiness

emotional-memory is production-hardened for teams that need supply-chain assurances:

Signal	Status
PyPI releases	Trusted Publishing (OIDC, no long-lived tokens)
SLSA provenance	Level 3 — build-provenance attestation on every release
SBOM	CycloneDX JSON generated and attested per release (dist/sbom.cdx.json)
PEP 740 attestations	Signed attestations verifiable via gh attestation verify
SAST	CodeQL workflow on every push/PR to main
Workflow security	All third-party GitHub Actions SHA-pinned; zizmor static analysis in CI
Dependency audit	pip-audit in CI on every push; no known CVEs
Coverage	≥80% branch coverage enforced; informational target 90%
Type safety	mypy strict + basedpyright (secondary) on every PR
Conventional commits	PR title enforced (amannn/action-semantic-pull-request)

# Verify provenance of a released wheel locally:
gh attestation verify emotional_memory-0.11.0-py3-none-any.whl \
  --repo gianlucamazza/emotional-memory

mem0 integration

EmotionalMemoryMem0Backend exposes the mem0 Memory API (add / search / get_all / delete / delete_all / reset / close) backed by the full AFT retrieval pipeline. No runtime mem0ai dependency is required — it's always available:

uv pip install "emotional-memory[sentence-transformers]"

from emotional_memory import EmotionalMemory, InMemoryStore
from emotional_memory.embedders import SentenceTransformerEmbedder
from emotional_memory.integrations import EmotionalMemoryMem0Backend

em = EmotionalMemory(store=InMemoryStore(), embedder=SentenceTransformerEmbedder())
backend = EmotionalMemoryMem0Backend(em, default_user_id="alice")

backend.add([{"role": "user", "content": "I had a wonderful day at the park."}])
results = backend.search("outdoors positive experiences")
print(results["results"][0]["memory"])

The backend stores memories verbatim. For LLM-based fact extraction, chain a real mem0.Memory instance as a pre-processor and store its extracted facts here. See the mem0 tutorial for the chain pattern.

LangChain integration

EmotionalMemoryChatHistory is a drop-in replacement for any LangChain chat history object. It backs the transcript with an EmotionalMemory instance so the affective state evolves naturally as the conversation unfolds, while letting you control which messages become retrievable memories.

uv pip install "emotional-memory[langchain,sentence-transformers]"

from emotional_memory import EmotionalMemory, InMemoryStore
from emotional_memory.embedders import SentenceTransformerEmbedder
from emotional_memory.integrations import (
    EmotionalMemoryChatHistory,
    recommended_conversation_policy,
)

em = EmotionalMemory(
    store=InMemoryStore(),
    embedder=SentenceTransformerEmbedder(),
)
history = EmotionalMemoryChatHistory(em, message_policy=recommended_conversation_policy)

# Works anywhere BaseChatMessageHistory is accepted:
history.add_user_message("I'm anxious about the deadline.")
history.add_ai_message("Let's break the work into smaller steps.")

print(history.messages)   # [HumanMessage(...), AIMessage(...)]

# The underlying engine has tracked the affective state:
state = em.get_state()
print(f"valence={state.core_affect.valence:.2f}  arousal={state.core_affect.arousal:.2f}")

With recommended_conversation_policy, user messages become retrievable memories, assistant messages update affective state without being stored, and control commands such as recall ... are ignored by retrieval. The adapter uses dependency injection — pass a fully-configured EmotionalMemory so you control the store backend and embedder. clear() removes stored memories, clears the transcript, and resets affective state.

Logging & Observability

The library uses the standard logging module. Enable debug output to trace the full pipeline:

import logging
logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG)
# or just for emotional_memory:
logging.getLogger("emotional_memory").setLevel(logging.DEBUG)

Debug events include: encode start/stored/resonance, retrieve start/done, reconsolidation triggers, LLM appraisal cache hits, and fallback activations.

A convenience helper configures the root logger with sensible defaults, optional JSON formatting, and environment-variable level control:

from emotional_memory import configure_logging

configure_logging(level="DEBUG")  # or "INFO", "WARNING", "ERROR"
# JSON output for production pipelines:
configure_logging(level="INFO", json_format=True)

Set the level via environment variable without code changes:

EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LOG_LEVEL=DEBUG uv run python my_script.py

OpenTelemetry tracing

Install the optional [otel] extra to get distributed spans on every engine operation:

uv pip install "emotional-memory[otel]"

from opentelemetry.sdk.trace import TracerProvider
from opentelemetry.sdk.trace.export import SimpleSpanProcessor
from opentelemetry.sdk.trace.export.in_memory_span_exporter import InMemorySpanExporter

provider = TracerProvider()
exporter = InMemorySpanExporter()
provider.add_span_processor(SimpleSpanProcessor(exporter))
# wire to your OTLP/Jaeger/Zipkin backend instead of InMemorySpanExporter

from opentelemetry import trace
trace.set_tracer_provider(provider)

# now all em.encode(), em.retrieve(), em.prune(), etc. emit spans automatically

Root spans are emitted for encode, retrieve, encode_batch, elaborate, observe, and prune. Child spans cover individual embed and store.search_by_embedding calls. Without the [otel] extra, all tracing is zero-overhead no-op.

Examples

The examples/ directory contains runnable scripts covering the full API. All scripts are self-contained and use a deterministic HashEmbedder so they run without any ML dependencies.

Script	Description	Extra
basic_usage.py	Encode/retrieve, reconsolidation, resonance links	—
advanced_config.py	ACT-R decay, mood regression, adaptive weights	—
appraisal_engines.py	Keyword, static, and custom appraisal rules	—
reconsolidation.py	Two-retrieval lability window (Nader & Schiller 2000)	—
async_usage.py	as_async(), SyncToAsync* adapters, encode_batch	—
persistence.py	SQLiteStore, save/load state, export/import, prune	[sqlite]
emotional_journal.py	Multi-session journaling with full lifecycle	[sqlite]
llm_appraisal.py	LLM-backed appraisal via OpenAI-compatible API	openai
httpx_llm_integration.py	httpx LLMCallable, .env config, 7 API deep-dives	httpx
sentence_transformers_embedder.py	SequentialEmbedder with real embeddings	sentence-transformers
visualization.py	All 8 matplotlib plot types	[viz]
resonance_network.py	Resonance graph and link-type distribution	[viz]
retrieval_signals.py	6-signal decomposition, radar chart, weight heatmap	[viz]

Run any script: uv run python examples/<script>.py

Development

make check                    # lint + typecheck + test
make cov                      # tests with branch coverage report
make bench                    # fidelity + performance benchmarks

# Real-LLM tests (require API key):
make llm-config                # print resolved LLM config (no secrets)
make test-llm                 # end-to-end integration tests
make bench-appraisal          # Scherer CPM prompt quality benchmarks

LLM test environment variables

Variable	Default	Purpose
EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_API_KEY	—	API key (required)
EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_BASE_URL	https://api.openai.com/v1	OpenAI-compatible endpoint
EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_MODEL	gpt-5-mini	Model
EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_REASONING_EFFORT	""	Reasoning budget for o-series / gpt-5 models (minimal / low / medium / high); omitted when empty
EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_OUTPUT_MODE	plain	LLM response mode: plain or json_object
EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_TIMEOUT_SECONDS	30	HTTP timeout for OpenAI-compatible calls
EMOTIONAL_MEMORY_LLM_REPEATS	3	Repeats per phrase in quality benchmarks

Citing

If you use emotional-memory in research, please cite:

@software{mazza_emotional_memory_2026,
  author    = {Mazza, Gianluca},
  title     = {{emotional-memory: Affective Field Theory for LLM Memory}},
  year      = {2026},
  version   = {0.11.2},
  doi       = {10.5281/zenodo.20440996},
  url       = {https://github.com/gianlucamazza/emotional-memory},
  license   = {MIT},
}

• Concept DOI (all versions): 10.5281/zenodo.19972258
• Paper draft (PDF) — Affective Field Theory: A Multi-Layer Model for Emotion-Aware Memory in LLMs
• arXiv-ready bundle: paper/arxiv-submission.tar.gz
• Pre-registration corpus: benchmarks/preregistration*.md

License

MIT — see LICENSE