mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

CFSafety: Comprehensive Fine-grained Safety Assessment for LLMs

arXiv 2410.21695 ↗First posted 29 Oct 2024cs.CL cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As large language models (LLMs) rapidly evolve, they bring significant conveniences to our work and daily lives, but also introduce considerable safety risks. These models can generate texts with social biases or unethical content, and under specific adversarial instructions, may even incite illegal activities. Therefore, rigorous safety assessments of LLMs are crucial. In this work, we introduce a safety assessment benchmark, CFSafety, which integrates 5 classic safety scenarios and 5 types of instruction attacks, totaling 10 categories of safety questions, to form a test set with 25k prompts. This test set was used to evaluate the natural language generation (NLG) capabilities of LLMs, employing a combination of simple moral judgment and a 1-5 safety rating scale for scoring. Using this benchmark, we tested eight popular LLMs, including the GPT series. The results indicate that while GPT-4 demonstrated superior safety performance, the safety effectiveness of LLMs, including this model, still requires improvement. The data and code associated with this study are available on GitHub.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Oct 2024.

Builds on

29 of 34 references.

References · 29

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  4. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  5. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
  6. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
  7. 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,144
  8. 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,235
  9. 2023A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 1,227
  10. 2021Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Modelscited by 957
  11. 2020Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPcited by 951
  12. 2021An Explanation of In-context Learning as Implicit Bayesian Inferencecited by 915
17 more
  1. 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 760
  2. 2023C-Eval: A Multi-Level Multi-Discipline Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Modelscited by 694
  3. 2021BBQ: A Hand-Built Bias Benchmark for Question Answeringcited by 683
  4. 2024How Johnny Can Persuade LLMs to Jailbreak Them: Rethinking Persuasion to Challenge AI Safety by Humanizing LLMscited by 533
  5. 2023Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Studycited by 420
  6. 2023Large Language Model Alignment: A Surveycited by 241
  7. 2023Multilingual Jailbreak Challenges in Large Language Modelscited by 222
  8. 2023SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of Large Language Modelscited by 189
  9. 2021Alignment of Language Agentscited by 167
  10. 2022Pile of Law: Learning Responsible Data Filtering from the Law and a 256GB Open-Source Legal Datasetcited by 113
  11. 2023Safety Assessment of Chinese Large Language Modelscited by 82
  12. 2024Red Teaming GPT-4V: Are GPT-4V Safe Against Uni/Multi-Modal Jailbreak Attacks?cited by 32
  13. 2023HARE: Explainable Hate Speech Detection with Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 30
  14. 2024All in How You Ask for It: Simple Black-Box Method for Jailbreak Attackscited by 30
  15. 2024The Ethics of Interaction: Mitigating Security Threats in LLMscited by 30
  16. 2023Robust Safety Classifier for Large Language Models: Adversarial Prompt Shieldcited by 24
  17. 2024Fast Adversarial Training against Textual Adversarial Attackscited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.