Related papers: A Coin Flip for Safety: LLM Judges Fail to Reliabl…

Large Language Model (LLM) based judges form the underpinnings of key safety evaluation processes such as offline benchmarking, automated red-teaming, and online guardrailing. This widespread requirement raises the crucial question: can we…

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities across diverse tasks, driving the development and widespread adoption of LLM-as-a-Judge systems for automated evaluation, including red teaming and benchmarking.…

LLM-based judges have emerged as a scalable alternative to human evaluation and are increasingly used to assess, compare, and improve models. However, the reliability of LLM-based judges themselves is rarely scrutinized. As LLMs become more…

We present the Judge Reliability Harness, an open source library for constructing validation suites that test the reliability of LLM judges. As LLM based scoring is widely deployed in AI benchmarks, more tooling is needed to efficiently…

The growing integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into critical societal domains has raised concerns about embedded biases that can perpetuate stereotypes and undermine fairness. Such biases may stem from historical inequalities in…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into high-stakes applications, making robust safety guarantees a central practical and commercial concern. Existing safety evaluations predominantly rely on fixed collections of…

Automated red teaming holds substantial promise for uncovering and mitigating the risks associated with the malicious use of large language models (LLMs), yet the field lacks a standardized evaluation framework to rigorously assess new…

Considerable research efforts have been devoted to ensuring that large language models (LLMs) align with human values and generate safe text. However, an excessive focus on sensitivity to certain topics can compromise the model's robustness…

Offering a promising solution to the scalability challenges associated with human evaluation, the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm is rapidly gaining traction as an approach to evaluating large language models (LLMs). However, there are still many…

Most adversarial evaluations of large language model (LLM) safety assess single prompts and report binary pass/fail outcomes, which fails to capture how safety properties evolve under sustained adversarial interaction. We present ADVERSA,…

The increasing deployment of large language models (LLMs) in safety-critical applications raises fundamental challenges in systematically evaluating robustness against adversarial behaviors. Existing red-teaming practices are largely manual…

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in a wide range of applications, yet remain vulnerable to adversarial jailbreak attacks that circumvent their safety guardrails. Existing evaluation frameworks typically report binary…

Safety evaluation of large language models (LLMs) increasingly relies on LLM-as-a-judge pipelines, but strong judges can still be expensive to use at scale. We study whether structured multi-agent debate can improve judge reliability while…

The $\textit{LLM-as-a-judge}$ paradigm has become the operational backbone of automated AI evaluation pipelines, yet rests on an unverified assumption: that judges evaluate text strictly on its semantic content, impervious to surrounding…

LLM-as-judge systems promise scalable, consistent evaluation. We find the opposite: judges are consistent, but not with each other; they are consistent with themselves. Across 3,240 evaluations (9 judges x 120 unique video x pack items x 3…

Robust verbal confidence generated by large language models (LLMs) is crucial for the deployment of LLMs to help ensure transparency, trust, and safety in many applications, including those involving human-AI interactions. In this paper, we…

Ensuring the safety and reliability of large language models (LLMs) in clinical practice is critical to prevent patient harm. However, LLMs are advancing so rapidly that static benchmarks quickly become obsolete or prone to overfitting,…

The ability to rigorously estimate the failure rates of large language models (LLMs) is a prerequisite for their safe deployment. Currently, however, practitioners often face a tradeoff between expensive human gold standards and potentially…

We present MultiBreak, a scalable and diverse multi-turn jailbreak benchmark to evaluate large language model (LLM) safety. Multi-turn jailbreaks mimic natural conversational settings, making them easier to bypass safety-aligned LLM than…

Jailbreak attacks cause large language models (LLMs) to generate harmful, unethical, or otherwise objectionable content. Evaluating these attacks presents a number of challenges, which the current collection of benchmarks and evaluation…