ST-WebAgentBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Safety and Trustworthiness in Web Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.06703v3
• Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2024 08:09:01 GMT
• Title: ST-WebAgentBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Safety and Trustworthiness in Web Agents
• Authors: Ido Levy, Ben Wiesel, Sami Marreed, Alon Oved, Avi Yaeli, Segev Shlomov,
• Abstract summary: We present STWebAgentBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate web agents safety and trustworthiness across six critical dimensions. This benchmark is grounded in a detailed framework that defines safe and trustworthy (ST) agent behavior. We open-source this benchmark and invite the community to contribute, with the goal of fostering a new generation of safer, more trustworthy AI agents.
• Score: 3.09793323158304
• License:
• Abstract: Recent advancements in Web agents have introduced novel architectures and benchmarks showcasing progress in autonomous web navigation and interaction. However, most existing benchmarks prioritize effectiveness and accuracy, overlooking factors like safety and trustworthiness which are essential for deploying web agents in enterprise settings. We present STWebAgentBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate web agents safety and trustworthiness across six critical dimensions, essential for reliability in enterprise applications. This benchmark is grounded in a detailed framework that defines safe and trustworthy (ST) agent behavior. Our work extends WebArena with safety templates and evaluation functions to assess safety policy compliance rigorously. We introduce the Completion Under Policy to measure task success while adhering to policies, alongside the Risk Ratio, which quantifies policy violations across dimensions, providing actionable insights to address safety gaps. Our evaluation reveals that current SOTA agents struggle with policy adherence and cannot yet be relied upon for critical business applications. We open-source this benchmark and invite the community to contribute, with the goal of fostering a new generation of safer, more trustworthy AI agents. All code, data, environment reproduction resources, and video demonstrations are available at https://sites.google.com/view/st-webagentbench/home.

Related papers

• Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents [72.92604341646691]
  We introduce Agent-SafetyBench, a comprehensive benchmark to evaluate the safety of large language models (LLMs) Agent-SafetyBench encompasses 349 interaction environments and 2,000 test cases, evaluating 8 categories of safety risks and covering 10 common failure modes frequently encountered in unsafe interactions. Our evaluation of 16 popular LLM agents reveals a concerning result: none of the agents achieves a safety score above 60%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T02:35:15Z)
• MobileSafetyBench: Evaluating Safety of Autonomous Agents in Mobile Device Control [20.796190000442053]
  We introduce MobileSafetyBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate the safety of mobile device-control agents. We develop a diverse set of tasks involving interactions with various mobile applications, including messaging and banking applications. Our experiments demonstrate that baseline agents, based on state-of-the-art LLMs, often fail to effectively prevent harm while performing the tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-23T02:51:43Z)
• SecCodePLT: A Unified Platform for Evaluating the Security of Code GenAI [47.11178028457252]
  We develop SecCodePLT, a unified and comprehensive evaluation platform for code GenAIs' risks. For insecure code, we introduce a new methodology for data creation that combines experts with automatic generation. For cyberattack helpfulness, we construct samples to prompt a model to generate actual attacks, along with dynamic metrics in our environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T21:17:22Z)
• Building a Cybersecurity Risk Metamodel for Improved Method and Tool Integration [0.38073142980732994]
  We report on our experience in applying a model-driven approach on the initial risk analysis step in connection with a later security testing. Our work rely on a common metamodel which is used to map, synchronise and ensure information traceability across different tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-12T10:18:26Z)
• Athena: Safe Autonomous Agents with Verbal Contrastive Learning [3.102303947219617]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been utilized as language-based agents to perform a variety of tasks. In this study, we introduce the Athena framework which leverages the concept of verbal contrastive learning. The framework also incorporates a critiquing mechanism to guide the agent to prevent risky actions at every step.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-20T17:21:10Z)
• Dissecting Adversarial Robustness of Multimodal LM Agents [70.2077308846307]
  We manually create 200 targeted adversarial tasks and evaluation scripts in a realistic threat model on top of VisualWebArena. We find that we can successfully break latest agents that use black-box frontier LMs, including those that perform reflection and tree search. We also use ARE to rigorously evaluate how the robustness changes as new components are added.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T17:32:48Z)
• TrustAgent: Towards Safe and Trustworthy LLM-based Agents [50.33549510615024]
  This paper presents an Agent-Constitution-based agent framework, TrustAgent, with a focus on improving the LLM-based agent safety. The proposed framework ensures strict adherence to the Agent Constitution through three strategic components: pre-planning strategy which injects safety knowledge to the model before plan generation, in-planning strategy which enhances safety during plan generation, and post-planning strategy which ensures safety by post-planning inspection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-02T17:26:23Z)
• ASSERT: Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming for Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models [65.79770974145983]
  ASSERT, Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming, consists of three methods -- semantically aligned augmentation, target bootstrapping, and adversarial knowledge injection. We partition our prompts into four safety domains for a fine-grained analysis of how the domain affects model performance. We find statistically significant performance differences of up to 11% in absolute classification accuracy among semantically related scenarios and error rates of up to 19% absolute error in zero-shot adversarial settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-14T17:10:28Z)
• Safety Margins for Reinforcement Learning [53.10194953873209]
  We show how to leverage proxy criticality metrics to generate safety margins. We evaluate our approach on learned policies from APE-X and A3C within an Atari environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-25T16:49:54Z)

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.