Imagine you're a librarian who can always find the right book on the shelf but sometimes accidentally reads aloud from a different book that's sitting open nearby. The problem isn't your catalog system — it's that your eyes wander while you're speaking. This paper shows that speech-LLMs have exactly this problem: they correctly identify which audio turn to draw from, but irrelevant historical values still leak into the answer through pathways that bypass source identification entirely. The committed claim: in multi-turn speech conversations, historical audio doesn't just add generic noise — it directs errors toward specific competing answers from the wrong turn. The authors demonstrate this on two recent models, MOSS-Audio and MiMo-Audio, using controlled experiments where they manipulate the content of historical turns while keeping the queried turn fixed. The errors aren't random; they are pulled toward the specific value stored in the irrelevant history. The architecture of interference splits into two distinct causal paths, and this is the paper's real contribution. In open-ended QA, most history-induced errors vanish when you block direct access from the answer computation to the irrelevant source representations — the librarian stops reading from the wrong book when you close it. But in multiple-choice settings, many errors persist even after blocking direct source access, because the historical value gets smuggled into the computation through question-candidate states. The irrelevant memory has already contaminated the way the model interprets the question options before you can cut it off. Low-dimensional causal interventions further decompose the problem into source-role information (which turn am I supposed to use?) and answer-value information (what did that turn actually say?). These peak at different layer depths in the model, and — critically — correcting the source-role signal does not eliminate the causal influence of competing values. The model can know which source to use and still be swayed by what the wrong source said. On naturally occurring errors, the authors test three interventions: strengthening the queried role signal, counteracting the historical value signal, and applying both jointly. Joint intervention gives the greatest recovery, confirming that the two interference paths are partially independent. This is a clean mechanistic result — you need to fix both the retrieval signal and the value-leakage channel. The integrity picture is reasonable for a mechanistic interpretability paper. The experiments are controlled, the causal interventions are well-defined, and results are shown on two independently developed models (MOSS-Audio and MiMo-Audio). The limitation is that both are tested in the same team's experimental framework, and neither model is frontier-scale. The paper is honest about its scope — it characterizes a failure mode rather than proposing a production fix. The practical upshot for anyone building multi-turn speech systems: retention and retrieval are necessary but not sufficient. You need a gating mechanism that controls how retained values enter the answer computation, not just which source gets attended to. The dual-path interference architecture suggests that attention-based source selection alone will not solve conversational memory reliability — you need value-level control at intermediate layers.
