Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This study introduces SAFARI, the first industrial benchmark evaluating large language models on ISO 26262-compliant automotive hazard analysis and risk assessment. Experiments reveal that while frontier models can generate plausible safety narratives, they struggle significantly with standardized risk classification, achieving a best-case macro-F1 of only 0.261 without meaningful gains from chain-of-thought prompting. These findings highlight critical gaps in LLM reliability for regulated functional-safety workflows and identify specific failure modes like context omission that require targeted expert oversight.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

SAFARI: An Industrial Benchmark for LLM-Assisted Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2609.20584v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly considered for safety-critical engineering, yet their reliability in regulated functional-safety workflows remains underexplored. We introduce SAFARI (Safety-Aware Functional Automotive Risk Inference), the first industrial benchmark for LLM-assisted automotive Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment (HARA) under ISO 26262. It contains 3,000 de-identified industrial HARA cases and evaluates two coupled tasks: open-ended hazard analysis and standards-grounded risk assessment. To evaluate open-ended HARA artifacts, we propose the first reference-anchored LLM-as-a-judge protocol with high expert correlation. Experiments with nine frontier LLMs show that models often produce plausible hazard narratives but remain weak at ISO 26262 risk classification, with the best ASIL macro-F1 reaching only 0.261. Chain-of-Thought prompting provides limited benefit and often degrades categorical risk assessment. Error analysis further localizes major failures to scenario-critical context omissions during hazard generation and to controllability misjudgments during risk assessment, indicating where expert oversight should be concentrated. The dataset can be obtained from https://github.com/xixi47520-hash/HARA.

Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly considered for safety-critical engineering, yet their reliability in regulated functional-safety workflows remains underexplored. We introduce SAFARI (Safety-Aware Functional Automotive Risk Inference), the first industrial benchmark for LLM-assisted automotive Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment (HARA) under ISO 26262. It contains 3,000 de-identified industrial HARA cases and evaluates two coupled tasks: open-ended hazard analysis and standards-grounded risk assessment. To evaluate open-ended HARA artifacts, we propose the first reference-anchored LLM-as-a-judge protocol with high expert correlation. Experiments with nine frontier LLMs show that models often produce plausible hazard narratives but remain weak at ISO 26262 risk classification, with the best ASIL macro-F1 reaching only 0.261. Chain-of-Thought prompting provides limited benefit and often degrades categorical risk assessment. Error analysis further localizes major failures to scenario-critical context omissions during hazard generation and to controllability misjudgments during risk assessment, indicating where expert oversight should be concentrated. The dataset can be obtained from this https URL.

Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2609.20584 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2609.20584v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.20584 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 249 words

Related coverage