Efficient Safety Benchmarking via Item Response Theory

Fabio Spagliardi, Mírian Silva, Ayan Datta, Aiden Zhou, Vamshi Krishna Bonagiri, Diogo Cruz

Keywords: safety evaluation, item response theory, computerized adaptive testing, efficient evaluation, LLM evaluation, AI safety

TL;DR: Item Response Theory and adaptive testing yield order-of-magnitude reductions in safety benchmark evaluation cost without losing leaderboard fidelity.

Abstract: Safety benchmarks for language models are typically evaluated using static paradigms that treat all items as equally informative for all models, an assumption that is particularly problematic for adversarial, highly heterogeneous safety items. Applied in full to modern benchmark suites, current evaluation procedures would require on the order of $10^5$ responses, most of which provide little ranking signal. We analyze six widely used safety benchmarks and make three contributions toward more efficient safety evaluation. First, we show that Item Response Theory (IRT) recovers interpretable structure on safety benchmarks, with ability estimates resolving differences among models that cluster at the ceiling of raw safety metrics. Second, we show that adaptive item selection, which dynamically chooses informative items for each model based on its responses, approximates full-benchmark rankings (Spearman's $\rho >$ 0.90), reducing evaluation cost by at least 80\% on every benchmark where this threshold is attainable, and by up to 99.9\%, achieved on AIR-Bench 2024. Third, we introduce a practical procedure for extracting a fixed, informative subset of items reusable across models, a static alternative to adaptive selection with savings of 80--99.8\% across benchmarks. Together, these results establish that psychometric methods enable benchmark-aware reductions in evaluation costs across the safety evaluation pipeline.

Email Sharing: We authorize the sharing of all author emails with Program Chairs.

Data Release: We authorize the release of our submission and author names to the public in the event of acceptance.

Submission Number: 326