web interface developers

Abstract: An agent that remembers what it did on a web page must decide when two pages count as the same. Memories built on observation similarity merge pages that look alike but behave differently, and GUIs are full of such pages: two tabs of one widget or two rows of one menu answer the same click differently. We define the merge rule as an action-conditioned bisimulation over the empirical predictive state graph a frozen agent fills as it acts. Two states merge only when their shared actions lead to agreeing outcomes and successor blocks under an affordance label. Observation similarity never enters the rule, and nothing is trained. It replaces the merge rule of an existing outcome-value memory, so a closed-loop comparison isolates it. On MiniWoB++ it raises success rate over a memoryless agent, while a control taking identical exploratory detours, the prior successor-representation merge, and the same criterion without action conditioning change nothing.

Abstract: Procedural memory lets language agents reuse successful routines, but reuse presumes that a stored routine remains applicable. We study what happens when that presumption is deliberately violated. The study combines a retrospective, human-assisted interface-adaptation case from BrowserGym TimeWarp with controlled frozen-memory comparisons on synthetic shopping decisions. During the documented WebShop V1-V6 development path, interface-specific code was adapted while the separately stored high-level procedure was not reported to change; this phase does not constitute an autonomous memory-agent evaluation. In the controlled phase, an early pilot produced one task on which two memory conditions selected a more expensive item while the no-memory condition selected the reference minimum. Follow-up probes did not establish a recurring row-order or identity-binding pattern. We then tested four forms of mismatch: changed quantities, a different evidence representation, a conflict between local and global optimization, and distributed promotion evidence, across 32 formal cells. Each cell used one temperature-0 generation with the same local qwen3:8b configuration and no adaptive retry. Across these pairs, none of the predefined diagnostic interference signatures appeared on the tasks for which they were defined when current-task evidence was explicit and sufficient. The result identifies a tested region of non-interference: a procedural memory can be mismatched without becoming behaviorally disruptive. It does not establish general safety or a mechanism. The remaining question is which additional conditions turn applicability mismatch into observable, memory-caused error.