mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

CyberThreat-Eval: Can Large Language Models Automate Real-World Threat Research?

arXiv 2603.09452 ↗First posted 10 Mar 2026cs.CR cs.CLcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Analyzing Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) from large volumes of data is critical for drafting and publishing comprehensive CTI reports. This process usually follows a three-stage workflow -- triage, deep search and TI drafting. While Large Language Models (LLMs) offer a promising route toward automation, existing benchmarks still have limitations. These benchmarks often consist of tasks that do not reflect real-world analyst workflows. For example, human analysts rarely receive tasks in the form of multiple-choice questions. Also, existing benchmarks often rely on model-centric metrics that emphasize lexical overlap rather than actionable, detailed insights essential for security analysts. Moreover, they typically fail to cover the complete three-stage workflow. To address these issues, we introduce CyberThreat-Eval, which is collected from the daily CTI workflow of a world-leading company. This expert-annotated benchmark assesses LLMs on practical tasks across all three stages as mentioned above. It utilizes analyst-centric metrics that measure factual accuracy, content quality, and operational costs. Our evaluation using this benchmark reveals important insights into the limitations of current LLMs. For example, LLMs often lack the nuanced expertise required to handle complex details and struggle to distinguish between correct and incorrect information. To address these challenges, the CTI workflow incorporates both external ground-truth databases and human expert knowledge. TRA allows human experts to iteratively provide feedback for continuous improvement. The code is available at hrefhttps://github.com/xschen-beb/CyberThreat-EvaltextttGitHub and hrefhttps://huggingface.co/datasets/xse/CyberThreat-EvaltextttHuggingFace.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Mar 2026.

Builds on

18 of 30 references.

References · 18

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
  3. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  4. 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,467
  5. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
  6. 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 301
  7. 2024Teams of LLM Agents can Exploit Zero-Day Vulnerabilitiescited by 93
  8. 2024CTIBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLMs in Cyber Threat Intelligencecited by 61
  9. 2024SEvenLLM: Benchmarking, Eliciting, and Enhancing Abilities of Large Language Models in Cyber Threat Intelligencecited by 20
  10. 2023Time for aCTIon: Automated Analysis of Cyber Threat Intelligence in the Wildcited by 15
  11. 2023AGIR: Automating Cyber Threat Intelligence Reporting with Natural Language Generationcited by 15
  12. 2024Evaluation of LLM Chatbots for OSINT-based Cyber Threat Awarenesscited by 14
6 more
  1. 2024SECURE: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Cybersecuritycited by 13
  2. 2024KGV: Integrating Large Language Models with Knowledge Graphs for Cyber Threat Intelligence Credibility Assessmentcited by 9
  3. 2024The Use of Large Language Models (LLM) for Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) in Cybercrime Forumscited by 6
  4. 2025Streamlining Security Vulnerability Triage with Large Language Modelscited by 3
  5. 2024CTISum: A New Benchmark Dataset For Cyber Threat Intelligence Summarizationcited by 2
  6. 2025COSINT-Agent: A Knowledge-Driven Multimodal Agent for Chinese Open Source Intelligencecited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.