arXiv AI

Evaluating Large Language Model Performance on International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code Compliance

The paper introduces DGEval, a benchmark of 1,678 questions designed to assess large language models (LLMs) on the International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code Amendment 42‑24. It evaluates 13 models from six providers, finding that while the best model surpasses human practitioners on multiple‑choice tasks, all models perform poorly on safety‑critical areas such as stowage, segregation, and regulatory recall. The study concludes that LLMs can aid compliance tasks—especially structured Dangerous Goods List lookups with web search—but human oversight and authoritative source verification remain essential for safety‑critical deployment.

arXiv AI
Jun 16

Consensus-based Agentic Large Language Model Framework for Harmonized Tariff Schedule Code Classification

arXiv:2606. 16987v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Accurate Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) code classification is essential for customs clearance, duty assessment, trade statistics, and regulatory compliance in maritime logistics.

By Truong Thanh Hung Nguyen, Khanh Van Quynh Nguyen, Hoang-Loc Cao, Tri Duong, Phuc Ho, Van Pham, Loc Nguyen, Hung Cao
arXiv Computation and Language
2d ago

SAFARI: An Industrial Benchmark for LLM-Assisted Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment

SAFARI is the first industrial benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in automotive hazard analysis and risk assessment (HARA) under ISO 26262. It comprises 3,000 de‑identified HARA cases and tests two tasks: open‑ended hazard generation and standards‑grounded risk classification, using a novel reference‑anchored LLM‑as‑a‑judge protocol. Experiments with nine state‑of‑the‑art LLMs show that while hazard narratives are often plausible, risk classification remains weak (best ASIL macro‑F1 = 0.261), with errors mainly due to missing scenario context and misjudged controllability. "whyItMatters":"The benchmark highlights the current limitations of LLMs in safety‑critical engineering workflows, guiding future research and expert oversight in automotive safety analysis."

By Chenxi Wu, Zimu Wang, Haiyang Zhang, Wei Wang, Zhijie Xu
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 26

Can Large Language Models Reliably Code Qualitative Humanitarian Data? A Benchmark Study Against Human Expert Adjudication

arXiv:2606. 26541v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Data from affected populations are crucial for informing humanitarian response, but their value depends on timely and consistent interpretation of nuanced accounts of need.

By Jerome Marston, Tino Kreutzer, Salom\'e Garnier, Ella Boone, Phuong N Pham, Patrick Vinck
arXiv AI
Aug 19

Benchmarking the Benchmarks: Evaluating Automated Safety Benchmarks for Small Language Models

The paper investigates whether existing AI safety benchmarks, designed for large language models, are suitable for evaluating small language models (SLMs). By testing five benchmark suites on 26 open‑source SLMs with a unified scoring rubric, the authors find that ambiguous judgments dominate, especially for complex prompts and certain architectures. This ambiguity, linked to factors like lexical density and output perplexity, undermines the reliability of aggregate leaderboards and reveals a confound between model capability and perceived safety.

By Nyamtulla Shaik, Fengjun Li, Bo Luo
arXiv AI
Aug 18

AeroCopilotBench: A Two-Tier Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents as Aviation Copilots in an Interactive Virtual Cockpit Environment

arXiv:2608. 16349v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents may assist flight crews with complex decisions and task execution, but existing aviation evaluations centered on static knowledge do not support systematic testing of procedural execution and safety compliance in interactive environments.

By Yuchen Yuan, Zhenghuang Wu, Yuangan Li, Liang Ma, Ke Li