How Should AI Safety Benchmarks Benchmark Safety?
arXiv:2601.23112v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI safety benchmarks are pivotal for safety in advanced AI systems; however, they have significant technical, epistemic, and sociotechnical shortcomings. We present a review of 210 safety benchmarks that maps out common challenges in safety benchmarking, documenting failures and limitations by drawing from engineering sciences and long-established theories of risk and safety. We argue that adhering to established risk management principles, map
Record details
Published: 6 August 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CY
Category: Research
Topics: Safety & alignment
Retrieved: 6 August 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Functional Misalignment in Human-AI Interactions on Digital Platforms
arXiv cs.CY · 6 August 2026
Governing Execution Risk in Agentic AI Systems: A Trajectory-Guided Framework for Red Teaming
arXiv cs.CY · 6 August 2026
Align-RAG: Alignment Is All You Need for TSFM In-Context Learning
arXiv cs.LG · 6 August 2026
Studying People to Study AI: Expert Perspectives on the Epistemic Fit and Barriers of Human Research in AI Safety & Ethics
arXiv cs.HC · 6 August 2026
Studying People to Study AI: Expert Perspectives on the Epistemic Fit and Barriers of Human Research in AI Safety & Ethics
arXiv · 6 August 2026
Breaking Customized LLMs for Coding: Automated Red Teaming for Instruction Backdoor Attacks
arXiv red teaming query · 6 August 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (6 August 2026), “How Should AI Safety Benchmarks Benchmark Safety?,” evidence record 16645, https://ethics.ai/record/16645 (originally published by arXiv cs.CY).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.