1. Have you measured the value provided by the knowledge graph layer over straight enterprise search (e.g., https://www.glean.com/) Benchmarks, please.

2. How do you deal with conflicting facts? In tech, the new is constantly replacing the old.

3. Is knowledge extraction real time? How fast is it in general?

Appreciate the thoughtful questions.

1. I'll address this in two parts.

(a) Memory vs. Enterprise Search. I consider search to address targeted, stateless retrieval whereas memory solves temporal, tacit, and derived problems. Glean can tell you why a ticket was filed or answer a specific question regarding a customer call. But in many companies, important questions are broader: "What went wrong the first time we went with this vendor?" "How has our brand shifted in tone over time?". These cannot be answered by a few documents, and it's not obvious whether this information would be in Slack or Notion or Drive. It requires an active, entropy-fighting system that is going to extract information and keep track of how it evolves over time.

(b) Benchmarks: absolutely. Don't want to claim anything before we've published results, but Hyper scores very well on LoCoMo and LongMemEval, and we are constantly trying to bolster our set of evals. We will publish results more openly in the coming weeks. I will caveat though: many SOTA memory providers are converging on the top end of these benchmarks, and yet we don't see mass adoption. We believe that UX affordances are underrated and critical to get "company brains" working in real, messy businesses. Many of our users have come to us from other providers purely because the competition was too difficult to use and maintain across the org.

2. Hyper maintains a graph of information where each node is an extracted "fact." This happens continuously, in the background, live from every connector or connected agent. At insertion-time, new information is compared against relevant information. Our system (a DAG of agentic nodes) determines the relationships between these facts and makes appropriate updates: X derives Y, A updates B. For now, we rely on recency as the primary indicator of conflict (i.e. we assume more recent information is generally more true than old information). We realize that this will need to become more sophisticated, and are iterating.

3. Knowledge extraction is real-time and asynchronous, and should add next to zero latency to any existing system. We continually update the graph in our backend, without relying on a nightly compaction/dreams cycle, so information from the world should be reflected in Hyper's responses in close to real time. Retrieval can be slightly more expensive, but the latency is negligible compared to the overhead of the calling agent. We recognize the importance of performance (we both worked on on-device robotics!) and are happy to publish numbers as we measure them :)