# The Automation Advantage in AI Red Teaming

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.19855 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.19855/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Prompt injection and agent security, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security.
- Builds on 11 of its 16 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 Apr 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM safety and security / [Prompt injection and agent security](https://mlsanity.com/safety/prompt-injection-and-agent-security/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Extracting Training Data from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.07805/) (2020)
- [Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02483/) (2023)
- [Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08419/) (2023)
- [Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09251/) (2022)
- [AutoDAN: Generating Stealthy Jailbreak Prompts on Aligned Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04451/) (2023)
- [Scalable Extraction of Training Data from (Production) Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.17035/) (2023)
- [Jailbreak and Guard Aligned Language Models with Only Few In-Context Demonstrations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06387/) (2023)
- [Ignore This Title and HackAPrompt: Exposing Systemic Vulnerabilities of LLMs through a Global Scale Prompt Hacking Competition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16119/) (2023)
- [Against The Achilles' Heel: A Survey on Red Teaming for Generative Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.00629/) (2024)
- [SafeRAG: Benchmarking Security in Retrieval-Augmented Generation of Large Language Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.18636/) (2025)
- [Summon a Demon and Bind it: A Grounded Theory of LLM Red Teaming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.06237/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [AIRTBench: Measuring Autonomous AI Red Teaming Capabilities in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.14682/) (2025)
- [A Systematic Review of Algorithmic Red Teaming Methodologies for Assurance and Security of AI Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.21267/) (2026)
- [Redefining AI Red Teaming in the Agentic Era: From Weeks to Hours](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.04019/) (2026)
- [A Translational Note on AI Safety Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.06573/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper analyzes Large Language Model (LLM) security vulnerabilities based on data from Crucible, encompassing 214,271 attack attempts by 1,674 users across 30 LLM challenges. Our findings reveal automated approaches significantly outperform manual techniques (69.5% vs 47.6% success rate), despite only 5.2% of users employing automation. We demonstrate that automated approaches excel in systematic exploration and pattern matching challenges, while manual approaches retain speed advantages in certain creative reasoning scenarios, often solving problems 5x faster when successful. Challenge categories requiring systematic exploration are most effectively targeted through automation, while intuitive challenges sometimes favor manual techniques for time-to-solve metrics. These results illuminate how algorithmic testing is transforming AI red-teaming practices, with implications for both offensive security research and defensive measures. Our analysis suggests optimal security testing combines human creativity for strategy development with programmatic execution for thorough exploration.