AISafetyBenchExplorer: A Metric-Aware Catalogue of AI Safety Benchmarks Reveals Fragmented Measurement and Weak Benchmark Governance

TL;DR

AISafetyBenchExplorer is a comprehensive catalogue of 195 AI safety benchmarks highlighting fragmentation, lack of standardization, and the need for better governance in AI safety measurement.

Contribution

The paper introduces AISafetyBenchExplorer, a structured, meta-analytical catalogue that organizes and analyzes AI safety benchmarks to improve measurement coherence.

Findings

Benchmark proliferation exceeds measurement standardization.

Most benchmarks are medium-complexity and English-only.

Many repositories and datasets are stale or inconsistently maintained.

Abstract

The rapid expansion of large language model (LLM) safety evaluation has produced a substantial benchmark ecosystem, but not a correspondingly coherent measurement ecosystem. We present AISafetyBenchExplorer, a structured catalogue of 195 AI safety benchmarks released between 2018 and 2026, organized through a multi-sheet schema that records benchmark-level metadata, metric-level definitions, benchmark-paper metadata, and repository activity. This design enables meta-analysis not only of what benchmarks exist, but also of how safety is operationalized, aggregated, and judged across the literature. Using the updated catalogue, we identify a central structural problem: benchmark proliferation has outpaced measurement standardization. The current landscape is dominated by medium-complexity benchmarks (94/195), while only 7 benchmarks occupy the Popular tier. The workbook further reports strong concentration around English-only evaluation (165/195), evaluation-only resources (170/195), stale GitHub repositories (137/195), stale Hugging Face datasets (96/195), and heavy reliance on arXiv preprints among benchmarks with known venue metadata. At the metric level, the catalogue shows that familiar labels such as accuracy, F1 score, safety score, and aggregate benchmark scores often conceal materially different judges, aggregation rules, and threat models. We argue that the field's main failure mode is fragmentation rather than scarcity. Researchers now have many benchmark artifacts, but they often lack a shared measurement language, a principled basis for benchmark selection, and durable stewardship norms for post publication maintenance. AISafetyBenchExplorer addresses this gap by providing a traceable benchmark catalogue, a controlled metadata schema, and a complexity taxonomy that together support more rigorous benchmark discovery, comparison, and meta-evaluation.