Compress the Context, Keep the Commitments: A Formal Framework for Verifiable LLM Context Compression
LLM context is not just tokens; it is a set of commitments. Long-running conversations accumulate goals, constraints, decisions, preferences, tool results, retrieved evidence, artifacts, and safety boundaries that future responses must preserve. Existing context-management methods reduce length through truncation, retrieval, summarization, memory systems, or token-level prompt compression, but they rarely specify which semantic commitments must survive compression or how their preservation should be measured. We propose Context Codec, a commitment-level framework for compressing prompts and chat histories. Context Codec represents dialogue state as typed, source-grounded semantic atoms with canonical identity, equivalence, conflict, confidence, risk, and evidence spans. It separates five concerns - extraction, normalization, representation, rendering, and verification - and introduces metrics for Critical Atom Recall, Weighted Atom Recall, Commitment Density, and round-trip recoverability. It also defines a taxonomy of semantic compression errors, a concrete normalization procedure, conservative fallback rules for low-confidence and safety-critical atoms, and Context Compression Language (CCL), an ASCII-first compact rendering of canonical JSON atoms. In a small diagnostic study, CCL-Core occupies a useful middle ground between structured prose and JSON: more explicit and auditable than prose, usually more compact than JSON, and less risky than heavily minified notation. The result is not a claim that shorthand solves compression, but a framework for making context compression verifiable: compress the conversation, keep the commitments.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
SemanticZip: A Pilot Framework for Lossy Text Compression with LLMs as Semantic Decompressors
Text compression for large language model (LLM) systems is usually framed as token deletion, retrieval, summarization, or exact reconstruction. We study a more aggressive but explicitly lossy setting: compress text into …
XFlow: An Executable Protocol Programming System for Reliable Multi-Agent Workflows
LLM-based multi-agent systems increasingly coordinate planning, reasoning, tool use, and human interaction, yet their reliability remains limited. A central source of this limitation is the underspecified prompt--harness…
Know your exceptions: Towards an Ontology of Exceptions in Knowledge Representation
Defeasible reasoning is a kind of reasoning where some generalisations may not be valid in all circumstances, that is general conclusions may fail in some cases. Various formalisms have been developed to model this kind …
Common Sense ReasoningvalidAutoformalizing Argumentative Material Inferences
Natural language arguments are compelling before they are formally explicit. A premise supports a claim through defeasible warrants, background commitments, and exception conditions that the text leaves implicit. However…
Justificatory and Explanatory Argumentation for Committing Agents
In the interaction between agents we can have an explicative discourse, when communicating preferences or intentions, and a normative discourse, when considering normative knowledge. For justifying their actions our agen…