# RACC: Representation-Aware Coverage Criteria for LLM Safety Testing

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.02280 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02280/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Jailbreaking, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security.
- Builds on 53 of its 75 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM safety and security / [Jailbreaking](https://mlsanity.com/safety/jailbreaking/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 53)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10560/) (2022)
- [Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1312.6034/) (2013)
- [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)
- [Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01405/) (2023)
- [Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06674/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek-Coder: When the Large Language Model Meets Programming -- The Rise of Code Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.14196/) (2024)
- [Safe RLHF: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12773/) (2023)
- [Baseline Defenses for Adversarial Attacks Against Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00614/) (2023)
- [GPTFUZZER: Red Teaming Large Language Models with Auto-Generated Jailbreak Prompts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.10253/) (2023)
- [Jailbreaking ChatGPT via Prompt Engineering: An Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13860/) (2023)
- ["Do Anything Now": Characterizing and Evaluating In-The-Wild Jailbreak Prompts on Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03825/) (2023)
- [Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deep](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05946/) (2024)
- [SmoothLLM: Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03684/) (2023)
- [Detecting Language Model Attacks with Perplexity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.14132/) (2023)
- [Jailbreak and Guard Aligned Language Models with Only Few In-Context Demonstrations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06387/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Model (LLM) Security and Privacy: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.02003/) (2023)
- [DeepXplore: Automated Whitebox Testing of Deep Learning Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.06640/) (2017)
- [Certifying LLM Safety against Adversarial Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.02705/) (2023)
- [Pretraining Language Models with Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08582/) (2023)
- [LLM Self Defense: By Self Examination, LLMs Know They Are Being Tricked](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07308/) (2023)
- [Large Language Model Alignment: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15025/) (2023)
- [RepairAgent: An Autonomous, LLM-Based Agent for Program Repair](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.17134/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) face severe safety risks from jailbreak attacks, yet current safety testing largely relies on static datasets and lacks systematic criteria to evaluate test suite quality and adequacy. While coverage criteria have proven effective for smaller neural networks, they are impractical for LLMs due to computational overhead and the entanglement of safety-critical signals with irrelevant neuron activations. To address these issues, we propose RACC (Representation-Aware Coverage Criteria), a set of coverage criteria specialized for LLM safety testing. RACC first extracts safety representations from the LLM's hidden states using a small calibration set of harmful prompts, then measures test prompts' concept activations against these directions, and finally computes coverage through six criteria assessing both individual and compositional safety concept coverage. Experiments on multiple LLMs and safety benchmarks show that RACC reliably rewards high-quality jailbreak test suites while remaining insensitive to redundant or invalid inputs, which is a key distinction that neuron-level criteria fail to make. We further demonstrate RACC's practical value in two applications, including test suite prioritization and attack prompt sampling, and validate its generalization across diverse settings and configurations. Overall, RACC provides a scalable and principled foundation for coverage-guided LLM safety testing.