# Benchmarking the Safety of Large Language Models for Robotic Health Attendant Control

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.26577 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.26577/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 39 of its 67 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 39)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.15556/) (2022)
- [Do As I Can, Not As I Say: Grounding Language in Robotic Affordances](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.01691/) (2022)
- [HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04249/) (2024)
- [Gemma: Open Models Based on Gemini Research and Technology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.08295/) (2024)
- [DeepSeek-V3.2: Pushing the Frontier of Open Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.02556/) (2025)
- [Phi-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.08905/) (2024)
- [Safe RLHF: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12773/) (2023)
- [XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.01263/) (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)
- [MedGemma Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.05201/) (2025)
- [Safety-Tuned LLaMAs: Lessons From Improving the Safety of Large Language Models that Follow Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.07875/) (2023)
- [Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14470/) (2024)
- [SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14598/) (2024)
- [SafeAgentBench: A Benchmark for Safe Task Planning of Embodied LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.13178/) (2024)
- [UltraMedical: Building Specialized Generalists in Biomedicine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.03949/) (2024)
- [A Framework for Human Evaluation of Large Language Models in Healthcare Derived from Literature Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.02559/) (2024)
- [SG-Bench: Evaluating LLM Safety Generalization Across Diverse Tasks and Prompt Types](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21965/) (2024)
- [Med42 -- Evaluating Fine-Tuning Strategies for Medical LLMs: Full-Parameter vs. Parameter-Efficient Approaches](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14779/) (2024)
- [MedSafetyBench: Evaluating and Improving the Medical Safety of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.03744/) (2024)
- [BadRobot: Jailbreaking Embodied LLM Agents in the Physical World](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.20242/) (2024)
- [Densing Law of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.04315/) (2024)
- [All in How You Ask for It: Simple Black-Box Method for Jailbreak Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.09798/) (2024)
- [A Novel Evaluation Benchmark for Medical LLMs: Illuminating Safety and Effectiveness in Clinical Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.23486/) (2025)
- [EARBench: Towards Evaluating Physical Risk Awareness for Task Planning of Foundation Model-based Embodied AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.04449/) (2024)
- [The Moral Machine Experiment on Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.05958/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Security and Privacy in Large-Model-Driven Embodied Agents: Attacks, Defenses, and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.27847/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly considered for deployment as the control component of robotic health attendants, yet their safety in this context remains poorly characterized. We introduce a dataset of 270 harmful instructions spanning nine prohibited behavior categories grounded in the American Medical Association Principles of Medical Ethics, and use it to evaluate 72 LLMs in a simulation environment based on the Robotic Health Attendant framework. The mean violation rate across all models was 54.4%, with more than half exceeding 50%, and violation rates varied substantially across behavior categories, with superficially plausible instructions such as device manipulation and emergency delay proving harder to refuse than overtly destructive ones. Model size and release date were the primary determinants of safety performance among open-weight models, and proprietary models were substantially safer than open-weight counterparts (median 23.7% versus 72.8%). Medical domain fine-tuning conferred no significant overall safety benefit, and a prompt-based defense strategy produced only a modest reduction in violation rates among the least safe models, leaving absolute violation rates at levels that would preclude safe clinical deployment. These findings demonstrate that safety evaluation must be treated as a first-class criterion in the development and deployment of LLMs for robotic health attendants.