Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

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

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

classification cs.AIcs.LG
keywords safetytrustworthinessllmsissuesmodelsverificationalignmentapplications
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
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.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The 4/$\delta$ Bound: Designing Predictable LLM-Verifier Systems for Formal Method Guarantee

    cs.AI 2025-11 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    The 4/δ bound is the mean of four geometric distributions, not a new theorem, and the simulation validation is circular.

Pith tools