Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

LongSafety: Evaluating Long-Context Safety of Large Language Models

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 2502.16971 v1 pith:7QGOM3GZ submitted 2025-02-24 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords safetylong-contextlongsafetymodelstaskscontextllmschallenges
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

As Large Language Models (LLMs) continue to advance in understanding and generating long sequences, new safety concerns have been introduced through the long context. However, the safety of LLMs in long-context tasks remains under-explored, leaving a significant gap in both evaluation and improvement of their safety. To address this, we introduce LongSafety, the first comprehensive benchmark specifically designed to evaluate LLM safety in open-ended long-context tasks. LongSafety encompasses 7 categories of safety issues and 6 user-oriented long-context tasks, with a total of 1,543 test cases, averaging 5,424 words per context. Our evaluation towards 16 representative LLMs reveals significant safety vulnerabilities, with most models achieving safety rates below 55%. Our findings also indicate that strong safety performance in short-context scenarios does not necessarily correlate with safety in long-context tasks, emphasizing the unique challenges and urgency of improving long-context safety. Moreover, through extensive analysis, we identify challenging safety issues and task types for long-context models. Furthermore, we find that relevant context and extended input sequences can exacerbate safety risks in long-context scenarios, highlighting the critical need for ongoing attention to long-context safety challenges. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/thu-coai/LongSafety.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. FORTRESS: Frontier Risk Evaluation for National Security and Public Safety

    cs.CY 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new benchmark with instance-specific rubrics measures frontier LLMs' willingness to assist with national security and public safety threats, alongside a paired over-refusal test.

  2. ShieldVLM: Safeguarding the Multimodal Implicit Toxicity via Deliberative Reasoning with LVLMs

    cs.MM 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ShieldVLM detects multimodal implicit toxicity through deliberate cross-modal reasoning, outperforming existing moderation APIs and models on the new MMIT benchmark.

  3. Measuring What Matters: A Framework for Evaluating Safety Risks in Real-World LLM Applications

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A practical framework for application-level LLM safety testing: organization-specific taxonomies plus black-box adversarial evaluation, illustrated by a Singapore government pilot.

Pith tools