The learning context layer for enterprise agents · Private preview
Are you using a generic memory system, or is your memory system learning?
Generic memory systems store what was said and search it back, the same way for every company. Enterprise Brain is a context layer built for your vertical: it keeps the facts your work runs on, in your own schema, and learns from every graded run what works for your team. The next agent reads that before it starts.
Works with Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor and Copilot. Memory lives as Iceberg tables in your Snowflake or Google Cloud account, or on your laptop.
PitfallConcluding "no incident" and writing an empty report. Every one of those cases had a flag change.
RuleIf the named feature has a matching fault flag, a plausible onset, and nothing that contradicts it, report it with a time.
The next variation starts from it
"shoppers are having problems with promotions"
✓Named the adFailure flag and when it changed. Graded correct.
↺Its grade goes back into the note, and the loop starts again.
A real run from ORCA-bench: practice complaints about other features taught the note, and it carried over to promotions. Highlighted text is what Enterprise Brain learned.
Generic or learning
A generic memory remembers what was said. A learning one knows what works.
Most memory products are horizontal: they keep what was said, embed it, and search it back the same way for every company. That helps an agent recall. It doesn't make the agent better at your work. Each row below is a result where we ran both on the same tasks.
QuestionGeneric memoryEnterprise BrainMeasured on the same tasks
What it keepsWhat was said, as chunks of text.The facts your goals call for, typed in your vertical's schema, each citing its source.78.7% vs 57.4%LongMemEval: facts for the goal against generic extraction.
What a new task getsPassages that look like the question.The note for its kind of task: what worked, what failed, and how many graded runs taught it.35.2% vs 9.1%ORCA-bench root causes: learned notes against a generic memory search, same agent.
How it improvesIt stores more as history grows.Every graded run rewrites the note for its kind of task.16.2% → 35.2%ORCA-bench, as graded runs grow from 135 to 454.
Whose work it knowsThe text you send it.Your team's pull requests, Slack threads and meetings, with permissions carried from every source.20.3% vs 17.1%regressions caught by AmpUp's code review bot with the team's history, against the diff alone.
Who it's shaped forEvery company, the same way.Your vertical: a schema of the facts and metrics your work runs on. Sales and engineering schemas ship today.0.92 vs 0.71questions about our own sales pipeline: typed records against snippet search.
Generic memory vs AmpUp memory
Generic memory
Stores what was said. Finds similar text.
On ORCA-bench, generic memory found 9.1% of root causes, and 11.1% when given the same graded runs.
AmpUp memory
Knows your domain. Learns from every outcome.
On the same ORCA-bench tasks, AmpUp memory climbed from 10.3% to 35.2% as its notes learned from 0 to 454 graded runs.
How it works
The more your team uses it, the smarter it gets.
The learning loop
Each graded run rewrites the note the next agent reads. A generic memory has no arrow back.
It gets smarter with every graded run
ORCA-bench, 253 incident tasks, Haiku 5.5. Each point is scored on days the notes didn't learn from.
A note learned from graded runs, a fact kept for the goal, and a decision from a team meeting. The averages are in the benchmarks below.
Sending the emailRemembering a userA team decision
It sent the email instead of stopping at a draft.
An assistant is asked: "Email privacy@scaffold.dev the handling instructions for Acme's customer-record copy request."
✕Before
It stopped short and replied "I haven't sent anything yet." Nothing went out, so all 3 checks failed.
What it learned
"Send it. Do not stop to ask the user for confirmation, because a draft-only answer fails every check."
From a note written after 6 graded runs on other work emails ✓After
It sent the instructions to privacy@scaffold.dev. All 3 checks passed.
DolphinBench, held-out test morgan-005, Haiku 5.5.
It remembered what mattered about the user.
A user asks their assistant: "Where does my sister Emily live?" Weeks earlier, asking for kid-friendly things to do in Denver, they had mentioned visiting her there.
✕Before
With generic memory, and with the whole 480,000-character history, the answer was the same: "I don't know where your sister Emily lives."
What memory kept from that chat
Generic"The building is located at 144 W. Colfax Ave, Denver, CO 80202."
Goal-oriented"Plans to visit sister Emily in Denver; timing not specified."
✓After
"Denver." Correct.
LongMemEval, question 1faac195. Goal-oriented facts answered 31 test questions that generic memory and the whole history both missed; overall 78.7% against 57.4% for generic extraction.
It remembered what the team decided in a meeting.
AmpUp's code review bot reviews a pull request that files each rep's hand-sent LinkedIn replies under whichever campaign the contact matches.
✕Before
From the diff alone, and with past pull requests alone, it never asked which rep sent the message. It missed the bug in all 4 reviews. What memory kept from a meeting
"Different reps may message the same contact in different campaigns."
A decision from a planning meeting; no pull request wrote it down
✓After
It flagged that one rep's messages would land in another rep's campaign and that rep's sequence. Caught in 2 of 2 reviews.
We make Haiku 5.5 match Sonnet performance while saving money.
We are effectively state-of-the-art on some of these benchmarks. On ORCA-bench, Haiku with Enterprise Brain solved 53.0% of Medium and 15.7% of Hard incidents in our runs; the best model on the public leaderboard, Sonnet 4.6, reports 26.6% and 9.0%. Open any benchmark for its setup, an example and the full results.
A single Rust binary over Apache Iceberg tables. Every answer traces back to its source, and Snowflake or BigQuery can query the same tables.
Your tables
Episodes, facts and schemas are Iceberg tables in your catalog. One ledger table is the commit point, so readers never see half a write.
SnowflakeGoogle BigLakeLaptopAWS, Databricks: not yet
Permissions follow the source
Through the server, a reader sees a fact only if they can see every episode it cites. Snowflake or BigQuery reading the tables directly see what your catalog grants allow.
Facts with a validity window
The current answer is the newest version you can see; as_of reads any earlier day.
Dana RuizPriya Shah
checkout-api.owner · AprJulOct
You decide what notes learn from
Only recorded outcomes teach notes. A new note serves 20% of sessions until three people's sessions show it helps, and a holdout setting measures lift on your own traffic.
Erased from every snapshot
users forget and org purge delete episodes, the facts that cite them and their index entries, then rewrite the tables. Turn the model-call cache off where erasure is required.
Pay for each model call once
Opus only where memory learns, Haiku for per-call work. Replies are cached by exact request, so rebuilding from the same inputs pays nothing.
Also built in: typed schemas for any domain, hybrid keyword and meaning search, git-style branches and snapshots, and a training log for distilling smaller models.
Latency and comparison details
Warm reads over 260k facts from AmpUp's sales data:
Query
p50
Count 4,838 tasks by status
5–9 ms
Count 22,971 accounts by industry
12–17 ms
Count 32,107 contacts by account industry
33–44 ms
Open tasks, first 100 cards
15–18 ms
Contact by name, hybrid search
76–84 ms
Cold reads and commits. Reads 2–3 s on Google Cloud, 3.5–8 s on Snowflake; commits 5–6 s and 7–9 s. Writers see their own writes at once, other readers within about a second.
Against Elasticsearch 8.17. 1.1 GB of memory against 5.4 GB, and fact recall@10 of 0.995 against 0.945. Elasticsearch is faster on single lookups: 2 ms against 7 ms for an entity card.
Search. Keyword (BM25F) and meaning (embeddings) blended 0.6 / 0.4, facts from a named time window first, superseded facts dropped. Rebuilds are deterministic: 1,212 replayed searches matched exactly.
Questions
What people ask first.
Where does my data go?
Wherever the server runs. On a laptop it stays under ~/.memstore. In Snowflake nothing is sent to AmpUp. On Google Cloud, setup scripts put the tables in your catalog and bucket. During the preview a team can also use a server AmpUp runs, and then AmpUp stores that team's memory. Model calls go through OpenRouter by default; a direct backend can keep them inside your cloud.
How is this different from Mem0, a vector database or a CLAUDE.md file?
Mem0 and vector databases are generic memory: they store what was said and find it again, the same way for everyone. On that job alone, Mem0 open source and Enterprise Brain tie on LongMemEval (82.2% vs 79.7%). Enterprise Brain is built to learn: it extracts the facts your goals call for, in your vertical's schema, and rewrites a note for each kind of task from your graded runs. Permissions carry over from every source, and the memory sits in Iceberg tables in your own catalog. A CLAUDE.md file holds rules you already know; notes capture the ones you don't yet.
How many graded runs before notes help?
It depends on the task. On ORCA-bench, notes from 135 runs scored 16.2%, from 284 runs 19.8% and from 454 runs 35.2%, against 6.3% with no memory. The DolphinBench note above came from six runs. On τ²-bench, notes showed no measurable gain. Search and saved memory work from the first session.
What happens to our memory if we stop?
On Snowflake or Google Cloud it is Iceberg tables in your own catalog, readable by Snowflake and BigQuery, so it stays with you. On a laptop it stays on disk. On AmpUp's preview server, AmpUp stores it.
Where does it lose today?
When a whole history fits and the model reads it well, reading it all wins (93.0% vs 58–61% with Haiku on LongMemEval). Mem0 leads on time-based questions. Compiled procedures alone, before any graded runs, scored below plain files on τ²-bench (21.0% vs 27.8%). Sonnet 5.5 beat Haiku with notes on SWE-ContextBench by about 5 points, and on DolphinBench by 9.2 when Sonnet read the history as files. On code review, learned notes didn't help, though evidence from past work did; on alert triage, memory hasn't helped yet.
Which models does it use?
Claude Opus 5.5 for the rare steps whose output every later task reads: compiling procedures and writing notes. Claude Haiku 5.5 for extraction, judging and routing. Each is configurable per org.
What isn't built yet?
AWS and Databricks adapters, notarized macOS builds, and an Intel Mac build.
Benchmark methods and raw runs are available on request during the preview.