Is your benchmark truly adversarial? AdvScore: Evaluating Human-Grounded Adversarialness
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Adversarial datasets should validate AI robustness by providing samples on which humans perform well, but models do not. However, as models evolve, datasets can become obsolete. Measuring whether a dataset remains adversarial is hindered by the lack of a standardized metric for measuring adversarialness. We propose AdvScore, a human-grounded evaluation metric that assesses a dataset's adversarialness by capturing models' and humans' varying abilities while also identifying poor examples. We then use AdvScore to motivate a new dataset creation pipeline for realistic and high-quality adversarial samples, enabling us to collect an adversarial question answering (QA) dataset, AdvQA. We apply AdvScore using 9,347 human responses and ten language models' predictions to track model improvement over five years, from 2020 to 2024. AdvScore thus provides guidance for achieving robustness comparable with human capabilities. Furthermore, it helps determine to what extent adversarial datasets continue to pose challenges, ensuring that, rather than reflecting outdated or overly artificial difficulties, they effectively test model capabilities.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 40 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jun 2024.
Builds on
40 of 62 references.
References · 40
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
- 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,779
- 2019Do ImageNet Classifiers Generalize to ImageNet?cited by 1,507
- 2022Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Modelscited by 1,054
- 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 983
- 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 979
- 2019Adversarial Examples Are Not Bugs, They Are Featurescited by 950
28 more
- 2018Robustness May Be at Odds with Accuracycited by 873
- 2019Plug and Play Language Models: A Simple Approach to Controlled Text Generationcited by 793
- 2019Universal Adversarial Triggers for Attacking and Analyzing NLPcited by 709
- 2017Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Timecited by 686
- 2018Annotation Artifacts in Natural Language Inference Datacited by 656
- 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 568
- 2021Dynabench: Rethinking Benchmarking in NLPcited by 447
- 2020AmbigQA: Answering Ambiguous Open-domain Questionscited by 385
- 2017Synthetic and Natural Noise Both Break Neural Machine Translationcited by 304
- 2018Adversarial Risk and the Dangers of Evaluating Against Weak Attackscited by 221
- 2021What Will it Take to Fix Benchmarking in Natural Language Understanding?cited by 200
- 2018Pathologies of Neural Models Make Interpretations Difficultcited by 140
- 2020Explaining NLP Models via Minimal Contrastive Editing (MiCE)cited by 105
- 2021Improving Question Answering Model Robustness with Synthetic Adversarial Data Generationcited by 77
- 2022CREPE: Open-Domain Question Answering with False Presuppositionscited by 70
- 2021Human-Adversarial Visual Question Answeringcited by 57
- 2021Comparing Test Sets with Item Response Theorycited by 55
- 2021Dynaboard: An Evaluation-As-A-Service Platform for Holistic Next-Generation Benchmarkingcited by 53
- 2023Large Language Models Help Humans Verify Truthfulness -- Except When They Are Convincingly Wrongcited by 51
- 2021Fool Me Twice: Entailment from Wikipedia Gamificationcited by 50
- 2019Learning Latent Parameters without Human Response Patterns: Item Response Theory with Artificial Crowdscited by 40
- 2019Quizbowl: The Case for Incremental Question Answeringcited by 36
- 2021On the Efficacy of Adversarial Data Collection for Question Answering: Results from a Large-Scale Randomized Studycited by 30
- 2018Analyzing Compositionality-Sensitivity of NLI Modelscited by 26
- 2021Quiz-Style Question Generation for News Storiescited by 23
- 2023What's the Meaning of Superhuman Performance in Today's NLU?cited by 22
- 2017Is Deep Learning Safe for Robot Vision? Adversarial Examples against the iCub Humanoidcited by 19
- 2023TaskLAMA: Probing the Complex Task Understanding of Language Modelscited by 12
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 3.
7 papers.
- 2025Which of These Best Describes Multiple Choice Evaluation with LLMs? A) Forced B) Flawed C) Fixable D) All of the Abovecited by 51
- 2025Cancer-Myth: Evaluating Large Language Models on Patient Questions with False Presuppositionscited by 15
- 2025A Good Plan is Hard to Find: Aligning Models with Preferences is Misaligned with What Helps Userscited by 6
- 2026BenchMarker: An Education-Inspired Toolkit for Highlighting Flaws in Multiple-Choice Benchmarkscited by 3
- 2025Data Swarms: Optimizable Generation of Synthetic Evaluation Datacited by 2
- 2026AUDITA: A New Dataset to Audit Humans vs. AI Skill at Audio QAcited by 1
- 2026AI, Take the Wheel: What Drives Delegation and Trust in Human-Computer Cooperative Question Answering?cited by 0
- 2026AI, Take the Wheel: What Drives Delegation and Trust in Human-Computer Cooperative Question Answering?27 May 2026
- 2026AUDITA: A New Dataset to Audit Humans vs. AI Skill at Audio QA23 Apr 2026
- 2026BenchMarker: An Education-Inspired Toolkit for Highlighting Flaws in Multiple-Choice Benchmarks5 Feb 2026
- 2025A Good Plan is Hard to Find: Aligning Models with Preferences is Misaligned with What Helps Users23 Sep 2025
- 2025Data Swarms: Optimizable Generation of Synthetic Evaluation Data31 May 2025
- 2025Cancer-Myth: Evaluating Large Language Models on Patient Questions with False Presuppositions15 Apr 2025
- 2025Which of These Best Describes Multiple Choice Evaluation with LLMs? A) Forced B) Flawed C) Fixable D) All of the Above19 Feb 2025