mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

InFerActive: Interactive Tree-Based Exploration of LLM Sampling for Safety Evaluation

arXiv 2512.10234 ↗First posted 11 Dec 2025cs.HC cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Even LLMs that appear safe during evaluation can still produce harmful responses in deployment. Because stochastic sampling yields different responses to the same prompt, low-probability harmful outputs can still reach users at scale. Common human evaluation workflows generate many random samples per prompt and review them in static spreadsheets. The practice scales poorly, forcing evaluators to repeatedly reread near-duplicate prefixes. To address this, we present InFerActive, an interactive system that visualizes sampling results as a navigable tree of readable phrases, allowing evaluators to filter, explore, and extend the generation space on demand. InFerActive utilizes breadth-first sampling, a novel tree construction procedure that matches the harmful-response coverage of random sampling while requiring up to 5.0x fewer samples. Two controlled user studies (N = 12 each) demonstrate that InFerActive significantly improves evaluation efficiency and coverage over both spreadsheet and basic tree baselines.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Dec 2025.

Builds on

18 of 47 references.

References · 18

  1. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  2. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
  3. 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 686
  4. 2024Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deepcited by 472
  5. 2023Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting Generationcited by 451
  6. 2024SafeDecoding: Defending against Jailbreak Attacks via Safety-Aware Decodingcited by 247
  7. 2024LLMs instead of Human Judges? A Large Scale Empirical Study across 20 NLP Evaluation Taskscited by 243
  8. 2023ChainForge: A Visual Toolkit for Prompt Engineering and LLM Hypothesis Testingcited by 88
  9. 2023EvalLM: Interactive Evaluation of Large Language Model Prompts on User-Defined Criteriacited by 74
  10. 2018Seq2Seq-Vis: A Visual Debugging Tool for Sequence-to-Sequence Modelscited by 69
  11. 2023Graphologue: Exploring Large Language Model Responses with Interactive Diagramscited by 66
  12. 2024Supporting Sensemaking of Large Language Model Outputs at Scalecited by 27
6 more
  1. 2024One vs. Many: Comprehending Accurate Information from Multiple Erroneous and Inconsistent AI Generationscited by 13
  2. 2024STAR: SocioTechnical Approach to Red Teaming Language Modelscited by 13
  3. 2025Interpretation Meets Safety: A Survey on Interpretation Methods and Tools for Improving LLM Safetycited by 10
  4. 2023Revealing the Unwritten: Visual Investigation of Beam Search Trees to Address Language Model Prompting Challengescited by 6
  5. 2025What's the Difference? Supporting Users in Identifying the Effects of Prompt and Model Changes Through Token Patternscited by 4
  6. 2025Narrative Studio: Visual narrative exploration using LLMs and Monte Carlo Tree Searchcited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Safety-Flag: A Unified Benchmark for the Reliability and Calibration of LLM Content Moderators
  2. 2026HarmProfile: Characterizing Harmful Distributions in Frontier LLMs
  3. 2025LLM-Safety Evaluations Lack Robustness
  4. 2025HarmMetric Eval: Benchmarking Metrics and Judges for LLM Harmfulness Assessment
  5. 2026SafeTune: A Unified Faithful Library for Auditing and Repairing Safety Drift in Fine-Tuned LLMs
  6. 2026Who Tests the Testers? Systematic Enumeration and Coverage Audit of LLM Agent Tool Call Safety
  7. 2025ASTRAL: Automated Safety Testing of Large Language Models
  8. 2025Safer or Luckier? LLMs as Safety Evaluators Are Not Robust to Artifacts