SafetyPrompts: a Systematic Review of Open Datasets for Evaluating and Improving Large Language Model Safety
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.05399v1
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2024 10:57:25 GMT
- Title: SafetyPrompts: a Systematic Review of Open Datasets for Evaluating and Improving Large Language Model Safety
- Authors: Paul Röttger, Fabio Pernisi, Bertie Vidgen, Dirk Hovy,
- Abstract summary: We conduct a first systematic review of open datasets for evaluating and improving large language models (LLMs) safety.
We highlight trends, such as a trend towards fully synthetic datasets, as well as gaps in dataset coverage, such as a clear lack of non-English datasets.
Our contributions are based on SafetyPrompts.com, a living catalogue of open datasets for LLM safety.
- Score: 27.843894102000608
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: The last two years have seen a rapid growth in concerns around the safety of large language models (LLMs). Researchers and practitioners have met these concerns by introducing an abundance of new datasets for evaluating and improving LLM safety. However, much of this work has happened in parallel, and with very different goals in mind, ranging from the mitigation of near-term risks around bias and toxic content generation to the assessment of longer-term catastrophic risk potential. This makes it difficult for researchers and practitioners to find the most relevant datasets for a given use case, and to identify gaps in dataset coverage that future work may fill. To remedy these issues, we conduct a first systematic review of open datasets for evaluating and improving LLM safety. We review 102 datasets, which we identified through an iterative and community-driven process over the course of several months. We highlight patterns and trends, such as a a trend towards fully synthetic datasets, as well as gaps in dataset coverage, such as a clear lack of non-English datasets. We also examine how LLM safety datasets are used in practice -- in LLM release publications and popular LLM benchmarks -- finding that current evaluation practices are highly idiosyncratic and make use of only a small fraction of available datasets. Our contributions are based on SafetyPrompts.com, a living catalogue of open datasets for LLM safety, which we commit to updating continuously as the field of LLM safety develops.
Related papers
- Exploring Automatic Cryptographic API Misuse Detection in the Era of LLMs [60.32717556756674]
This paper introduces a systematic evaluation framework to assess Large Language Models in detecting cryptographic misuses.
Our in-depth analysis of 11,940 LLM-generated reports highlights that the inherent instabilities in LLMs can lead to over half of the reports being false positives.
The optimized approach achieves a remarkable detection rate of nearly 90%, surpassing traditional methods and uncovering previously unknown misuses in established benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-23T15:31:26Z) - CLAMBER: A Benchmark of Identifying and Clarifying Ambiguous Information Needs in Large Language Models [60.59638232596912]
We introduce CLAMBER, a benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs)
Building upon the taxonomy, we construct 12K high-quality data to assess the strengths, weaknesses, and potential risks of various off-the-shelf LLMs.
Our findings indicate the limited practical utility of current LLMs in identifying and clarifying ambiguous user queries.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-20T14:34:01Z) - Unveiling the Misuse Potential of Base Large Language Models via In-Context Learning [61.2224355547598]
Open-sourcing of large language models (LLMs) accelerates application development, innovation, and scientific progress.
Our investigation exposes a critical oversight in this belief.
By deploying carefully designed demonstrations, our research demonstrates that base LLMs could effectively interpret and execute malicious instructions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-16T13:22:54Z) - AEGIS: Online Adaptive AI Content Safety Moderation with Ensemble of LLM Experts [0.0]
As Large Language Models (LLMs) and generative AI become more widespread, the content safety risks associated with their use also increase.
We find a notable deficiency in high-quality content safety datasets and benchmarks that comprehensively cover a wide range of critical safety areas.
To address this, we define a broad content safety risk taxonomy, comprising 13 critical risk and 9 sparse risk categories.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-09T03:54:28Z) - Exploring Advanced Methodologies in Security Evaluation for LLMs [16.753146059652877]
Large Language Models (LLMs) represent an advanced evolution of earlier, simpler language models.
They boast enhanced abilities to handle complex language patterns and generate coherent text, images, audios, and videos.
Rapid expansion of LLMs has raised security and ethical concerns within the academic community.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-28T01:32:58Z) - Large Language Models for Data Annotation: A Survey [49.8318827245266]
The emergence of advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) presents an unprecedented opportunity to automate the complicated process of data annotation.
This survey includes an in-depth taxonomy of data types that LLMs can annotate, a review of learning strategies for models utilizing LLM-generated annotations, and a detailed discussion of the primary challenges and limitations associated with using LLMs for data annotation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-21T00:44:04Z) - Data Contamination Through the Lens of Time [21.933771085956426]
Large language models (LLMs) are often supported by evaluating publicly available benchmarks.
This practice raises concerns of data contamination, i.e., evaluating on examples that are explicitly or implicitly included in the training data.
We conduct the first thorough longitudinal analysis of data contamination in LLMs by using the natural experiment of training cutoffs in GPT models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-16T17:51:29Z) - TRACE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Continual Learning in Large
Language Models [52.734140807634624]
Aligned large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional capabilities in task-solving, following instructions, and ensuring safety.
Existing continual learning benchmarks lack sufficient challenge for leading aligned LLMs.
We introduce TRACE, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate continual learning in LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-10T16:38:49Z) - Do-Not-Answer: A Dataset for Evaluating Safeguards in LLMs [59.596335292426105]
This paper collects the first open-source dataset to evaluate safeguards in large language models.
We train several BERT-like classifiers to achieve results comparable with GPT-4 on automatic safety evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-25T14:02:12Z) - Assessing Hidden Risks of LLMs: An Empirical Study on Robustness,
Consistency, and Credibility [37.682136465784254]
We conduct over a million queries to the mainstream large language models (LLMs) including ChatGPT, LLaMA, and OPT.
We find that ChatGPT is still capable to yield the correct answer even when the input is polluted at an extreme level.
We propose a novel index associated with a dataset that roughly decides the feasibility of using such data for LLM-involved evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-15T15:44:51Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.