Skip to content
← Back to explorer

HFEPX Hub

General + Red Team (Last 60 Days)

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Mar 8, 2026). 11 papers are grouped in this hub page.

Read Full Context

Updated from current HFEPX corpus (Mar 8, 2026). 11 papers are grouped in this hub page. Common evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics. Most common rater population: Domain Experts. Common annotation unit: Multi Dim Rubric. Common metric signal: jailbreak success rate. Use this page to compare protocol setup, judge behavior, and labeling design decisions before running new eval experiments. Newest paper in this set is from Mar 3, 2026.

Papers: 11 Last published: Mar 3, 2026 Global RSS Tag RSS
GeneralRed TeamLast 60d

Researcher Quick Triage

This hub is best used for protocol triage and replication planning from abstract-level evidence. Quality band: Developing .

High-Signal Coverage

100.0%

11 / 11 sampled papers are not low-signal flagged.

Replication-Ready Set

0

Benchmark + metric + eval mode explicitly present.

Judge/Human Comparability

0

Papers containing both `human_eval` and `llm_as_judge`.

  • 0 papers are replication-ready (benchmark + metric + explicit evaluation mode).
  • 0 papers support judge-vs-human agreement analysis.
  • 0 papers report explicit quality controls (calibration/adjudication/IAA).

Primary action: Use this page for scouting only; collect additional papers before attempting replication-critical comparisons.

Why This Matters For Eval Research

  • 100% of papers report explicit human-feedback signals, led by red-team protocols.
  • automatic metrics appears in 45.5% of papers in this hub.
  • tool-use evaluation appears in 9.1% of papers, indicating agentic evaluation demand.

Protocol Takeaways

  • Quality-control reporting is sparse in this slice; prioritize papers with explicit calibration or adjudication steps.
  • Rater context is mostly domain experts, and annotation is commonly multi-dimensional rubrics; use this to scope replication staffing.
  • Track metric sensitivity by reporting both jailbreak success rate and success rate.

Metric Interpretation

  • jailbreak success rate is reported in 27.3% of hub papers (3/11); compare with a secondary metric before ranking methods.
  • success rate is reported in 27.3% of hub papers (3/11); compare with a secondary metric before ranking methods.
Researcher Checklist (Expanded)

Researcher Checklist

  • Strong: Papers with explicit human feedback

    Coverage is strong (100% vs 45% target).

  • Gap: Papers reporting quality controls

    Coverage is a replication risk (0% vs 30% target).

  • Gap: Papers naming benchmarks/datasets

    Coverage is a replication risk (0% vs 35% target).

  • Strong: Papers naming evaluation metrics

    Coverage is strong (36.4% vs 35% target).

  • Gap: Papers with known rater population

    Coverage is a replication risk (9.1% vs 35% target).

  • Gap: Papers with known annotation unit

    Coverage is a replication risk (9.1% vs 35% target).

Strengths

  • Strong human-feedback signal (100% of papers).

Known Gaps

  • Only 0% of papers report quality controls; prioritize calibration/adjudication evidence.
  • Rater population is under-specified (9.1% coverage).
  • Annotation unit is under-specified (9.1% coverage).

Suggested Next Analyses

  • Track metric sensitivity by reporting both jailbreak success rate and success rate.
Recommended Queries (Expanded)

Recommended Queries

Start with These 3

Use these when you need one protocol anchor, one benchmark anchor, and one recent comparison point before reading the wider hub.

Start Here (Best First 6)

Ranked for protocol completeness (human signal, benchmark + metric anchors, quality controls, and judge/human overlap).

Protocol Matrix (Top 12)

Use this to quickly compare protocol ingredients instead of scanning long prose.

Paper HF Signal Eval Modes Benchmarks Metrics QC
MUSE: A Run-Centric Platform for Multimodal Unified Safety Evaluation of Large Language Models

Mar 3, 2026

Yes Automatic Metrics Not Reported Success rate , Jailbreak success rate Not Reported
MANATEE: Inference-Time Lightweight Diffusion Based Safety Defense for LLMs

Feb 21, 2026

Yes Automatic Metrics Not Reported Success rate , Jailbreak success rate Not Reported
FENCE: A Financial and Multimodal Jailbreak Detection Dataset

Feb 20, 2026

Yes Automatic Metrics Not Reported Accuracy Not Reported
What Matters For Safety Alignment?

Jan 7, 2026

Yes Automatic Metrics Not Reported Success rate , Jailbreak success rate Not Reported
SibylSense: Adaptive Rubric Learning via Memory Tuning and Adversarial Probing

Feb 24, 2026

Yes Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
A Systematic Review of Algorithmic Red Teaming Methodologies for Assurance and Security of AI Applications

Feb 24, 2026

Yes Automatic Metrics Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
TAO-Attack: Toward Advanced Optimization-Based Jailbreak Attacks for Large Language Models

Mar 3, 2026

Yes Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
Alignment-Weighted DPO: A principled reasoning approach to improve safety alignment

Feb 24, 2026

Yes Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
Intent Laundering: AI Safety Datasets Are Not What They Seem

Feb 17, 2026

Yes Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
Exposing the Systematic Vulnerability of Open-Weight Models to Prefill Attacks

Feb 16, 2026

Yes Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported
Jailbreaking Leaves a Trace: Understanding and Detecting Jailbreak Attacks from Internal Representations of Large Language Models

Feb 12, 2026

Yes Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported

Protocol Diff (Top Papers)

Fast side-by-side comparison for the highest-ranked papers in this hub.

Signal MUSE: A Run-Centric Platform for Multimodal Unified… MANATEE: Inference-Time Lightweight Diffusion Based… FENCE: A Financial and Multimodal Jailbreak Detecti…
Human Feedback Red TeamRed TeamRed Team
Evaluation Modes Automatic MetricsAutomatic MetricsAutomatic Metrics
Benchmarks Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Metrics Success rate, Jailbreak success rateSuccess rate, Jailbreak success rateAccuracy
Quality Controls Not reportedNot reportedNot reported
Rater Population UnknownUnknownUnknown
Annotation Unit UnknownUnknownUnknown
Suggested Reading Order (Extended)

This section is intentionally expanded only when needed; use “Start Here” above for a faster pass.

Suggested Reading Order

  1. TAO-Attack: Toward Advanced Optimization-Based Jailbreak Attacks for Large Language Models

    Start here for detailed protocol reporting and quality-control evidence. Signals: red-team protocols. Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success across diverse applications but remain vulnerable to.

  2. MUSE: A Run-Centric Platform for Multimodal Unified Safety Evaluation of Large Language Models

    Start here for detailed protocol reporting and quality-control evidence. Signals: automatic metrics + red-team protocols. Focus: success rate. Abstract: We present MUSE (Multimodal Unified Safety Evaluation), an open-source,.

  3. Alignment-Weighted DPO: A principled reasoning approach to improve safety alignment

    Start here for detailed protocol reporting and quality-control evidence. Signals: pairwise preferences. Abstract: Recent advances in alignment techniques such as Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback.

  4. What Matters For Safety Alignment?

    Include a human-eval paper to calibrate against judge-based evaluation settings. Signals: automatic metrics + red-team protocols. Focus: success rate. Abstract: This paper presents a comprehensive empirical study on.

  5. MANATEE: Inference-Time Lightweight Diffusion Based Safety Defense for LLMs

    Adds automatic metrics with red-team protocols for broader protocol coverage within this hub. Signals: automatic metrics + red-team protocols. Focus: success rate. Abstract: Defending LLMs against adversarial jailbreak.

  6. FENCE: A Financial and Multimodal Jailbreak Detection Dataset

    Adds automatic metrics with red-team protocols for broader protocol coverage within this hub. Signals: automatic metrics + red-team protocols. Focus: accuracy. Abstract: Jailbreaking poses a significant risk to.

  7. SibylSense: Adaptive Rubric Learning via Memory Tuning and Adversarial Probing

    Adds evaluation protocol evidence with rubric ratings for broader protocol coverage within this hub. Signals: rubric ratings. Abstract: Rubrics provide structured, interpretable supervision, but scaling rubric construction is.

  8. A Systematic Review of Algorithmic Red Teaming Methodologies for Assurance and Security of AI Applications

    Adds automatic metrics with red-team protocols for broader protocol coverage within this hub. Signals: automatic metrics + red-team protocols. Abstract: Cybersecurity threats are becoming increasingly sophisticated, making traditional.

Known Limitations

Known Limitations

  • Only 0% of papers report quality controls; prioritize calibration/adjudication evidence.
  • Rater population is under-specified (9.1% coverage).
  • Narrative synthesis is grounded in metadata and abstracts only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
Research Utility Snapshot (Detailed)

Research Utility Snapshot

Human Feedback Mix

  • Red Team (11)
  • Pairwise Preference (1)
  • Rubric Rating (1)

Evaluation Modes

  • Automatic Metrics (5)

Top Benchmarks

Top Metrics

  • Jailbreak success rate (3)
  • Success rate (3)
  • Accuracy (1)

Rater Population Mix

  • Domain Experts (1)

Quality Controls

Coverage diagnostics (sample-based): human-feedback 100.0% · benchmarks 0.0% · metrics 36.4% · quality controls 0.0%.

Top Papers

Related Hubs

Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.