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

• Data Advisor: Dynamic Data Curation for Safety Alignment of Large Language Models [79.65071553905021]
  We propose Data Advisor, a method for generating data that takes into account the characteristics of the desired dataset. Data Advisor monitors the status of the generated data, identifies weaknesses in the current dataset, and advises the next iteration of data generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T17:59:58Z)
• LLM-PBE: Assessing Data Privacy in Large Language Models [111.58198436835036]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become integral to numerous domains, significantly advancing applications in data management, mining, and analysis. Despite the critical nature of this issue, there has been no existing literature to offer a comprehensive assessment of data privacy risks in LLMs. Our paper introduces LLM-PBE, a toolkit crafted specifically for the systematic evaluation of data privacy risks in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-23T01:37:29Z)
• HARMONIC: Harnessing LLMs for Tabular Data Synthesis and Privacy Protection [44.225151701532454]
  In this paper, we introduce a new framework HARMONIC for tabular data generation and evaluation. Our framework achieves equivalent performance to existing methods with better privacy, which also demonstrates our evaluation framework for the effectiveness of synthetic data and privacy risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-06T03:21:13Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• 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.