I hope that paper also has a rational, scientific explanation for how the sun has time to tend a herd of cattle amid all these complex astronomical movements.

Seriously, I never really understand what this kind of study is attempting to do. I mean, is the implication that we're supposed to take the whole poem as fact now? Will the same scientists be looking for evidence of the cyclops and the lotus eaters? Are we to expect mathematical proof for the existence of Poseidon?

Someone far more qualified than me will no doubt answer your specific questions about memory and oral composition, but I do have a few further thoughts. The Odyssey is one of the greatest works of art produced in ancient Greece. It is full of beautiful and complicated imagery that has fascinating audiences for millennia. It's an adventure story, it's a religious text, and it's a moral and social commentary. It is not, nor was it ever intended to be, a faithful historical record of actual events. To think of it in that way sucks all the joy from reading it. If all you're thinking when you read about Odysseus journeying to the underworld is "this can't be real, but I wonder if there's a cave somewhere with exactly the right rock formations, which Homer falsely believed was the entrance to the land of the dead. We should go measure all the caves in Greece and check!" then you're missing the chance to think about what an ancient society thought about life after death, about glory, and about family. You're also missing out on a damn good story, which is ultimately the point of the whole thing.