SG-Bench: Evaluating LLM Safety Generalization Across Diverse Tasks and Prompt Types
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.21965v1
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 11:47:01 GMT
- Title: SG-Bench: Evaluating LLM Safety Generalization Across Diverse Tasks and Prompt Types
- Authors: Yutao Mou, Shikun Zhang, Wei Ye,
- Abstract summary: We develop a novel benchmark to assess the generalization of large language model (LLM) safety across various tasks and prompt types.
This benchmark integrates both generative and discriminative evaluation tasks and includes extended data to examine the impact of prompt engineering and jailbreak on LLM safety.
Our assessment reveals that most LLMs perform worse on discriminative tasks than generative ones, and are highly susceptible to prompts, indicating poor generalization in safety alignment.
- Score: 21.683010095703832
- License:
- Abstract: Ensuring the safety of large language model (LLM) applications is essential for developing trustworthy artificial intelligence. Current LLM safety benchmarks have two limitations. First, they focus solely on either discriminative or generative evaluation paradigms while ignoring their interconnection. Second, they rely on standardized inputs, overlooking the effects of widespread prompting techniques, such as system prompts, few-shot demonstrations, and chain-of-thought prompting. To overcome these issues, we developed SG-Bench, a novel benchmark to assess the generalization of LLM safety across various tasks and prompt types. This benchmark integrates both generative and discriminative evaluation tasks and includes extended data to examine the impact of prompt engineering and jailbreak on LLM safety. Our assessment of 3 advanced proprietary LLMs and 10 open-source LLMs with the benchmark reveals that most LLMs perform worse on discriminative tasks than generative ones, and are highly susceptible to prompts, indicating poor generalization in safety alignment. We also explain these findings quantitatively and qualitatively to provide insights for future research.
Related papers
- ASTRAL: Automated Safety Testing of Large Language Models [6.1050306667733185]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently gained attention due to their ability to understand and generate sophisticated human-like content.
We present ASTRAL, a tool that automates the generation and execution of test cases (i.e., prompts) for testing the safety of LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-28T18:25:11Z) - SafeBench: A Safety Evaluation Framework for Multimodal Large Language Models [75.67623347512368]
We propose toolns, a comprehensive framework designed for conducting safety evaluations of MLLMs.
Our framework consists of a comprehensive harmful query dataset and an automated evaluation protocol.
Based on our framework, we conducted large-scale experiments on 15 widely-used open-source MLLMs and 6 commercial MLLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-24T17:14:40Z) - Beyond Binary: Towards Fine-Grained LLM-Generated Text Detection via Role Recognition and Involvement Measurement [51.601916604301685]
Large language models (LLMs) generate content that can undermine trust in online discourse.
Current methods often focus on binary classification, failing to address the complexities of real-world scenarios like human-LLM collaboration.
To move beyond binary classification and address these challenges, we propose a new paradigm for detecting LLM-generated content.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-18T08:14:10Z) - SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal Behaviors [64.9938658716425]
Existing evaluations of large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests face three limitations.
First, existing methods often use coarse-grained of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics.
Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations.
Third, existing evaluations rely on large LLMs for evaluation, which can be expensive.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z) - SLM as Guardian: Pioneering AI Safety with Small Language Models [6.799423428734095]
Internalizing safeguard features into larger models brought challenges of higher training cost and unintended degradation of helpfulness.
In this paper, we leverage a smaller LLM for both harmful query detection and safeguard response generation.
We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, providing on par or surpassing harmful query detection and safeguard response performance compared to the publicly available LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-30T08:03:15Z) - ALERT: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Safety through Red Teaming [64.86326523181553]
ALERT is a large-scale benchmark to assess safety based on a novel fine-grained risk taxonomy.
It aims to identify vulnerabilities, inform improvements, and enhance the overall safety of the language models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-06T15:01:47Z) - SALAD-Bench: A Hierarchical and Comprehensive Safety Benchmark for Large Language Models [107.82336341926134]
SALAD-Bench is a safety benchmark specifically designed for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs)
It transcends conventional benchmarks through its large scale, rich diversity, intricate taxonomy spanning three levels, and versatile functionalities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-07T17:33:54Z) - Safety Assessment of Chinese Large Language Models [51.83369778259149]
Large language models (LLMs) may generate insulting and discriminatory content, reflect incorrect social values, and may be used for malicious purposes.
To promote the deployment of safe, responsible, and ethical AI, we release SafetyPrompts including 100k augmented prompts and responses by LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-20T16:27:35Z)
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.