mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

SAFETY-J: Evaluating Safety with Critique

arXiv 2407.17075 ↗First posted 24 Jul 2024cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in content generation raises significant safety concerns, particularly regarding the transparency and interpretability of content evaluations. Current methods, primarily focused on binary safety classifications, lack mechanisms for detailed critique, limiting their utility for model improvement and user trust. To address these limitations, we introduce SAFETY-J, a bilingual generative safety evaluator for English and Chinese with critique-based judgment. SAFETY-J utilizes a robust training dataset that includes diverse dialogues and augmented query-response pairs to assess safety across various scenarios comprehensively. We establish an automated meta-evaluation benchmark that objectively assesses the quality of critiques with minimal human intervention, facilitating scalable and continuous improvement. Additionally, SAFETY-J employs an iterative preference learning technique to dynamically refine safety assessments based on meta-evaluations and critiques. Our evaluations demonstrate that SAFETY-J provides more nuanced and accurate safety evaluations, thereby enhancing both critique quality and predictive reliability in complex content scenarios. To facilitate further research and application, we open-source SAFETY-J's training protocols, datasets, and code at https://github.com/GAIR-NLP/Safety-J.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jul 2024.

Builds on

20 of 33 references.

References · 20

  1. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  5. 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,124
  6. 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 828
  7. 2024WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wildcited by 598
  8. 2020Recipes for building an open-domain chatbotcited by 593
  9. 2023GPTFUZZER: Red Teaming Large Language Models with Auto-Generated Jailbreak Promptscited by 520
  10. 2020Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignmentcited by 443
  11. 2022Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluatorscited by 372
  12. 2022A Holistic Approach to Undesired Content Detection in the Real Worldcited by 337
8 more
  1. 2023PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning Optimizationcited by 311
  2. 2022A New Generation of Perspective API: Efficient Multilingual Character-level Transformerscited by 181
  3. 2023Shepherd: A Critic for Language Model Generationcited by 96
  4. 2023CValues: Measuring the Values of Chinese Large Language Models from Safety to Responsibilitycited by 80
  5. 2021On the Safety of Conversational Models: Taxonomy, Dataset, and Benchmarkcited by 73
  6. 2024ShieldLM: Empowering LLMs as Aligned, Customizable and Explainable Safety Detectorscited by 48
  7. 2023Align on the Fly: Adapting Chatbot Behavior to Established Normscited by 22
  8. 2024LLMCRIT: Teaching Large Language Models to Use Criteriacited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

3 papers.