Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

Risk Taxonomy, Mitigation, and Assessment Benchmarks of Large Language Model Systems

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2401.05778 v1 pith:YOLSFPNO submitted 2024-01-11 cs.CL cs.AI

Risk Taxonomy, Mitigation, and Assessment Benchmarks of Large Language Model Systems

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords systemslanguagemodulemitigationassessmentbenchmarkscomprehensivecorresponding
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have strong capabilities in solving diverse natural language processing tasks. However, the safety and security issues of LLM systems have become the major obstacle to their widespread application. Many studies have extensively investigated risks in LLM systems and developed the corresponding mitigation strategies. Leading-edge enterprises such as OpenAI, Google, Meta, and Anthropic have also made lots of efforts on responsible LLMs. Therefore, there is a growing need to organize the existing studies and establish comprehensive taxonomies for the community. In this paper, we delve into four essential modules of an LLM system, including an input module for receiving prompts, a language model trained on extensive corpora, a toolchain module for development and deployment, and an output module for exporting LLM-generated content. Based on this, we propose a comprehensive taxonomy, which systematically analyzes potential risks associated with each module of an LLM system and discusses the corresponding mitigation strategies. Furthermore, we review prevalent benchmarks, aiming to facilitate the risk assessment of LLM systems. We hope that this paper can help LLM participants embrace a systematic perspective to build their responsible LLM systems.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Adversarial Diffusion Across Modalities: A Fusion Survey of Attacks, Defenses, and Evaluation for Text, Vision, and Vision-Language Models

    cs.CR 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A narrative survey that catalogs fifty papers on diffusion-based adversarial techniques across text, vision, and vision-language models, proposes a six-class taxonomy of diffusion roles plus a unified five-dimension e...

  2. PERSA: Reinforcement Learning for Professor-Style Personalized Feedback with LLMs

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    PERSA combines RLHF with selective parameter-efficient updates to top transformer layers, raising style alignment scores from 35% to 96% on code feedback benchmarks while holding correctness near 100%.

  3. SafeCtrl-RL: Inference-Time Adaptive Behaviour Control for LLM Dialogue via RL-Driven Prompt Optimisation

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    SafeCtrl-RL frames LLM dialogue as a sequential decision process and uses an RL agent to iteratively refine prompts for safety at inference time.

  4. AI Safety Landscape for Large Language Models: Taxonomy, State-of-the-art, and Future Directions

    cs.AI 2024-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    The paper introduces a taxonomy of AI safety for LLMs organized into Trustworthy AI, Responsible AI, and Safe AI perspectives, accompanied by a review of state-of-the-art methods, challenges, and future directions.

  5. LLM Harms: A Taxonomy and Discussion

    cs.CY 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    This paper proposes a taxonomy of LLM harms in five categories and suggests mitigation strategies plus a dynamic auditing system for responsible development.

  6. LLM Harms: A Taxonomy and Discussion

    cs.CY 2025-12 reject novelty 3.0

    Proposes a five-bucket taxonomy of LLM harms and calls for dynamic auditing, but the systematic review behind it is not reproducible and contains mismatched citations.