LLM-Safety Evaluations Lack Robustness
원문 초록
In this paper, we argue that current safety alignment research efforts for large language models are hindered by many intertwined sources of noise, such as small datasets, methodological inconsistencies, and unreliable evaluation setups. This can, at times, make it impossible to evaluate and compare attacks and defenses fairly, thereby slowing progress. We systematically analyze the LLM safety evaluation pipeline, covering dataset curation, optimization strategies for automated red-teaming, response generation, and response evaluation using LLM judges. At each stage, we identify key issues and highlight their practical impact. We also propose a set of guidelines for reducing noise and bias in evaluations of future attack and defense papers. Lastly, we offer an opposing perspective, highlighting practical reasons for existing limitations. We believe that addressing the outlined problems in future research will improve the field's ability to generate easily comparable results and make measurable progress.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
BitBypass: A New Direction in Jailbreaking Aligned Large Language Models with Bitstream Camouflage
TRIDENT: Enhancing Large Language Model Safety with Tri-Dimensional Diversified Red-Teaming Data Synthesis
MTSA: Multi-turn Safety Alignment for LLMs through Multi-round Red-teaming
Benign Samples Matter! Fine-tuning On Outlier Benign Samples Severely Breaks Safety
$\texttt{SAGE}$: A Generic Framework for LLM Safety Evaluation
sudo rm -rf agentic_security
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.