Abstract
A growing class of conversational-memory systems compresses dialogue history into structured artifacts (extracted facts, decisions, or events) on the premise that distilled structure retrieves better than raw text. We test this premise with a controlled ablation: within one fixed retrieval--rerank--reasoning pipeline, we swap only the stored representation (LLM-extracted typed artifacts versus verbatim conversation chunks), holding the model, retriever, reranker, and judge constant. Verbatim chunks win by 15.9 points on LoCoMo (43.9% vs. 28.0%) and 22.0 points on LongMemEval-S (67.4% vs. 45.4%); a 1-hop semantic graph does not recover the gap, and six confound controls reproduce the effect. The mechanism is lossy distillation, not structure per se: accuracy tracks how much source text survives in the store, and the extracted-artifact pipeline does not beat naive RAG in overall accuracy (though chunks abstain worse; see Limitations). For the extraction designs we test, structured memory should augment verbatim text rather than replace it: adding artifacts alongside chunks preserves accuracy; substituting them forfeits the gap. Code and data: https://github.com/tao-hpu/cog-canvas