Guanhua Chen

Hengxiang Zhang, Hongfu Gao, Qiang Hu et al.

With the rapid development of Large language models (LLMs), understanding the capabilities of LLMs in identifying unsafe content has become increasingly important. While previous works have introduced several benchmarks to evaluate the safety risk of LLMs, the community still has a limited understanding of current LLMs' capability to recognize illegal and unsafe content in Chinese contexts. In this work, we present a Chinese safety benchmark (ChineseSafe) to facilitate research on the content safety of large language models. To align with the regulations for Chinese Internet content moderation, our ChineseSafe contains 205,034 examples across 4 classes and 10 sub-classes of safety issues. For Chinese contexts, we add several special types of illegal content: political sensitivity, pornography, and variant/homophonic words. Moreover, we employ two methods to evaluate the legal risks of popular LLMs, including open-sourced models and APIs. The results reveal that many LLMs exhibit vulnerability to certain types of safety issues, leading to legal risks in China. Our work provides a guideline for developers and researchers to facilitate the safety of LLMs. Our results are also available at https://huggingface.co/spaces/SUSTech/ChineseSafe-Benchmark. Additionally, we release a test set comprising 200,000 examples, which is publicly accessible at https://huggingface.co/datasets/SUSTech/ChineseSafe.

Yutao Hou, Yajing Luo, Zhiwen Ruan et al.

Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable performance across various tasks, prompting researchers to develop diverse evaluation benchmarks. However, existing benchmarks typically measure the ability of LLMs to respond to individual questions, neglecting the complex interactions in real-world applications. In this paper, we introduce Compound Question Synthesis (CQ-Syn) to create the Compound-QA benchmark, focusing on compound questions with multiple sub-questions. This benchmark is derived from existing QA datasets, annotated with proprietary LLMs and verified by humans for accuracy. It encompasses five categories: Factual-Statement, Cause-and-Effect, Hypothetical-Analysis, Comparison-and-Selection, and Evaluation-and-Suggestion. It evaluates the LLM capability in terms of three dimensions including understanding, reasoning, and knowledge. Our assessment of eight open-source LLMs using Compound-QA reveals distinct patterns in their responses to compound questions, which are significantly poorer than those to non-compound questions. Additionally, we investigate various methods to enhance LLMs performance on compound questions. The results indicate that these approaches significantly improve the models' comprehension and reasoning abilities on compound questions.