The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2305.11391 · v2 · pith:VSRHHAZ7 · submitted 2023-05-19 · cs.AI · cs.LG

A Survey of Safety and Trustworthiness of Large Language Models through the Lens of Verification and Validation

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:VSRHHAZ7record.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.AI cs.LG
keywords safetytrustworthinessllmsissuesmodelsverificationalignmentapplications
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have exploded a new heatwave of AI for their ability to engage end-users in human-level conversations with detailed and articulate answers across many knowledge domains. In response to their fast adoption in many industrial applications, this survey concerns their safety and trustworthiness. First, we review known vulnerabilities and limitations of the LLMs, categorising them into inherent issues, attacks, and unintended bugs. Then, we consider if and how the Verification and Validation (V&V) techniques, which have been widely developed for traditional software and deep learning models such as convolutional neural networks as independent processes to check the alignment of their implementations against the specifications, can be integrated and further extended throughout the lifecycle of the LLMs to provide rigorous analysis to the safety and trustworthiness of LLMs and their applications. Specifically, we consider four complementary techniques: falsification and evaluation, verification, runtime monitoring, and regulations and ethical use. In total, 370+ references are considered to support the quick understanding of the safety and trustworthiness issues from the perspective of V&V. While intensive research has been conducted to identify the safety and trustworthiness issues, rigorous yet practical methods are called for to ensure the alignment of LLMs with safety and trustworthiness requirements.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. A Multi-Source Framework for Relational Validation of Large Language Models Using Expert-Curated Encyclopedic Sources

    cs.SI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    The multi-source framework identifies a consistent relational deficit in LLMs, where they recognize domain concepts but fail to reproduce their relational structures when compared to expert encyclopedias across fields...

  2. Hard to Read, Easy to Jailbreak: How Visual Degradation Bypasses MLLM Safety Alignment

    cs.CV 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    Degraded image resolution in MLLMs bypasses safety alignments via cognitive overload, raising jailbreak rates across perturbations.

  3. Pop Quiz Attack: Black-box Membership Inference Attacks Against Large Language Models

    cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    PopQuiz Attack infers LLM training data membership by turning examples into quiz questions and measuring answer accuracy, reaching 0.873 average ROC-AUC across six models and outperforming prior methods by 20.6%.

  4. Policy-Aware Edge LLM-RAG Framework for Internet of Battlefield Things Mission Orchestration

    cs.NI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    PA-LLM-RAG adds policy retrieval and dual-LLM verification to enable reliable low-latency mission orchestration in simulated IoBT environments, with Gemma-2B reaching 100% policy compliance at 4.17s latency.