aiXamine: Simplified LLM Safety and Security

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.14985v2
• Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 16:52:54 GMT
• Title: aiXamine: Simplified LLM Safety and Security
• Authors: Fatih Deniz, Dorde Popovic, Yazan Boshmaf, Euisuh Jeong, Minhaj Ahmad, Sanjay Chawla, Issa Khalil,
• Abstract summary: We present aiXamine, a comprehensive black-box evaluation platform for safety and security.<n>AiXamine integrates over 40 tests (i.e., benchmarks) organized into eight key services targeting specific dimensions of safety and security.<n>The platform aggregates the evaluation results into a single detailed report per model, providing a breakdown of model performance, test examples, and rich visualizations.
• Score: 7.933485586826888
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) for safety and security remains a complex task, often requiring users to navigate a fragmented landscape of ad hoc benchmarks, datasets, metrics, and reporting formats. To address this challenge, we present aiXamine, a comprehensive black-box evaluation platform for LLM safety and security. aiXamine integrates over 40 tests (i.e., benchmarks) organized into eight key services targeting specific dimensions of safety and security: adversarial robustness, code security, fairness and bias, hallucination, model and data privacy, out-of-distribution (OOD) robustness, over-refusal, and safety alignment. The platform aggregates the evaluation results into a single detailed report per model, providing a detailed breakdown of model performance, test examples, and rich visualizations. We used aiXamine to assess over 50 publicly available and proprietary LLMs, conducting over 2K examinations. Our findings reveal notable vulnerabilities in leading models, including susceptibility to adversarial attacks in OpenAI's GPT-4o, biased outputs in xAI's Grok-3, and privacy weaknesses in Google's Gemini 2.0. Additionally, we observe that open-source models can match or exceed proprietary models in specific services such as safety alignment, fairness and bias, and OOD robustness. Finally, we identify trade-offs between distillation strategies, model size, training methods, and architectural choices.

Related papers

• REVAL: A Comprehension Evaluation on Reliability and Values of Large Vision-Language Models [59.445672459851274]
  REVAL is a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate the textbfREliability and textbfVALue of Large Vision-Language Models. REVAL encompasses over 144K image-text Visual Question Answering (VQA) samples, structured into two primary sections: Reliability and Values. We evaluate 26 models, including mainstream open-source LVLMs and prominent closed-source models like GPT-4o and Gemini-1.5-Pro.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T07:54:35Z)
• MMDT: Decoding the Trustworthiness and Safety of Multimodal Foundation Models [101.70140132374307]
  Multimodal foundation models (MMFMs) play a crucial role in various applications, including autonomous driving, healthcare, and virtual assistants.<n>Existing benchmarks on multimodal models either predominantly assess the helpfulness of these models, or only focus on limited perspectives such as fairness and privacy.<n>We present the first unified platform, MMDT (Multimodal DecodingTrust), designed to provide a comprehensive safety and trustworthiness evaluation for MMFMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-19T01:59:44Z)
• Rethinking Bottlenecks in Safety Fine-Tuning of Vision Language Models [25.606641582511106]
  We propose a novel dataset that integrates multi-image inputs with safety Chain-of-Thought (CoT) labels as fine-grained reasoning logic to improve model performance.<n>Our experiments demonstrate that fine-tuning InternVL2.5-8B with MIS significantly outperforms both powerful open-source models and API-based models in challenging multi-image tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T17:59:45Z)
• 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)
• ShieldGemma: Generative AI Content Moderation Based on Gemma [49.91147965876678]
  ShieldGemma is a suite of safety content moderation models built upon Gemma2. Models provide robust, state-of-the-art predictions of safety risks across key harm types.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-31T17:48:14Z)
• SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal [64.9938658716425]
  SORRY-Bench is a proposed benchmark for evaluating large language models' (LLMs) ability to recognize and reject unsafe user requests.<n>First, existing methods often use coarse-grained taxonomy of unsafe topics, and are over-representing some fine-grained topics.<n>Second, linguistic characteristics and formatting of prompts are often overlooked, like different languages, dialects, and more -- which are only implicitly considered in many evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T17:56:07Z)
• MLLMGuard: A Multi-dimensional Safety Evaluation Suite for Multimodal Large Language Models [39.97454990633856]
  We present MLLMGuard, a multidimensional safety evaluation suite for MLLMs. It includes a bilingual image-text evaluation dataset, inference utilities, and a lightweight evaluator. Our evaluation results across 13 advanced models indicate that MLLMs still have a substantial journey ahead before they can be considered safe and responsible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T13:41:33Z)
• Large Language Model Confidence Estimation via Black-Box Access [30.490207799344333]
  We explore the problem of estimating confidence for responses of large language models (LLMs) with simply black-box or query access to them.<n>We propose a simple and generalize framework where, we engineer novel features and train a (interpretable) model (viz. logistic regression) on these features to estimate the confidence.<n>We empirically demonstrate that our simple framework is effective in estimating confidence of Flan-ul2,-13b, Mistral-7b and GPT-4 on four benchmark Q&A tasks as well as Pegasus-large and BART-large on two benchmark summarization tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-01T02:08:44Z)
• 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.