Research — GenIntAI Lab

Research in the open, measured honestly.

We work on the architecture of AI itself. Every experiment is logged with what worked, what failed and what we changed — and our research repository is public.

02 — Research log

How Tree-Memory got here

Failures are part of the record. The sequence below is why the design looks the way it does.

10–11 Oct 2026

Prototype and fixes (v1, v2)

Four candidate architectures built. Stale radii explained most of the early cost growth; refreshing them cut reads 7×. Trained keys cut certified reads 5.6–22× on a synthetic task.

Report
Oct 2026

Real-model conversion, root cause

On Qwen2.5-0.5B the tree structure was fine, but computable bounds were 4–17× wider than the true score spread, so nothing could be pruned. Fix: train the keys.

exp01–05
Oct 2026

Trained routing keys — run 1 missed

A 16-dimensional routing head fell short: recall dropped from 0.59 to 0.28 once the clustering loss switched on. We traced it to a self-reinforcing loss and planned run 2.

exp06
16 Oct 2026

Chess testbed: rules, learning, recall

100% rule accuracy on unseen games; the memory scaled to 262,144 addresses at 347× fewer reads; sleep consolidation first failed, then was fixed.

exp07–08
17 Oct 2026

Final chess validation — passed

A factored tree read held at about 9.4 × log₂ n from 4K to 1M addresses: 189 reads of 1,048,576, identical to full attention.

exp09
03 — How we work

Our standards

Same answer as full attention

An efficiency gain only counts if the answer is identical. We report recall, KL divergence and top-1 agreement against full attention.

Scale to a million

Every memory result is measured from thousands to a million-plus addresses, with the growth exponent fitted — so “log n” is a measurement, not a slogan.

Report the failures

Negative results go in the log with their diagnosis. They are usually the most useful part.