DeepSafe‑SciHazard introduces a real‑world‑grounded benchmark for measuring scientific safety risks, comprising 2,400 hazardous and 600 oversafety questions across 12 disciplines. It defines a decomposed harm scoring system, DeHarm‑Score, that evaluates query severity, refusal behavior, and response‑level risk, further breaking down harm into executability and net‑new risk. An expert‑validation study shows DeHarm‑Score aligns 90.17% better with expert judgments than the best baseline, and the benchmark reveals that deep research agents score 32.3% higher on mean DeHarm‑Score than standard LLMs, highlighting a critical blind spot in current safety defenses.
arXiv:2607. 18665v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly support science, but they can also convert hazardous scientific knowledge into actionable misuse guidance.
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly support science, but they can also convert hazardous scientific knowledge into actionable misuse guidance. Existing benchmarks often rely on templated queries disconnected from real-world hazards, and employ LLM-as-a-Judge paradigms without domain grounding.
arXiv:2606. 18936v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in AI for Science (AI4Science) workflows, from scientific question answering and literature analysis to laboratory planning and autonomous discovery.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in AI for Science (AI4Science) workflows, from scientific question answering and literature analysis to laboratory planning and autonomous discovery. This progress creates an urgent need for safety benchmarks that evaluate not only scientific competence, but also whether models recognize and avoid risks in high-stakes scientific contexts.
DRYLAB‑Bench is a new benchmark that measures the biosecurity risk of large language models (LLMs) when they design biological mutations. It presents 30 hazardous mutation‑design scenarios and evaluates LLMs in a multi‑round, tool‑augmented setting, scoring designs against 187,695 empirical wet‑lab measurements using a Biosecurity Risk Score. Initial tests on 15 frontier models show that even without tools, a majority of designs exceed average risk, and tool use further amplifies the threat.
arXiv:2609.01210v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Safety benchmarks for large language models often assess the risk of a user query, although the outcome of question answering depends on whether the...
arXiv:2508. 00923v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to answer health-related questions and support healthcare workflows, yet evidence for their safety still relies heavily on static benchmarks that can rapidly become obsolete or be optimized against.
Safety benchmarks for large language models often assess the risk of a user query, although the outcome of question answering depends on whether the response violates a policy. This distinction is cri...
arXiv:2606. 28332v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for medical and health-related questions, yet their safety in high-risk medical scenarios remains poorly understood.
arXiv:2601. 17642v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Safety alignment in Large Language Models is critical for healthcare; however, reliance on binary refusal boundaries often results in over-refusal of benign queries or unsafe compliance with harmful ones.
arXiv:2606. 08234v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based scientific agents have shown strong capacity for autonomous research, yet their safety layers remain structurally divorced from core reasoning: they inspect pipeline outputs rather than shaping the deliberation that produces them.
arXiv:2606. 00160v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) suffer from degraded safety capabilities even when fine-tuned with benign datasets.