Dynamic Intelligence Assessment: Benchmarking LLMs on the Road to AGI with a Focus on Model Confidence

As machine intelligence evolves, the need to test and compare the problem-solving abilities of different AI models grows. However, current benchmarks are often overly simplistic, allowing models to perform uniformly well, making it difficult to distinguish their capabilities. Additionally, benchmarks typically rely on static question-answer pairs, which models might memorize or guess. To address these limitations, we introduce the Dynamic Intelligence Assessment (DIA), a novel methodology for testing AI models using dynamic question templates and improved metrics across multiple disciplines such as mathematics, cryptography, cybersecurity, and computer science. The accompanying DIA-Bench dataset, which includes 150 diverse and challenging task templates with mutable parameters, is presented in various formats such as text, PDFs, compiled binaries, and visual puzzles. Our framework introduces four new metrics to assess a model's reliability and confidence across multiple attempts. These metrics revealed that even simple questions are frequently answered incorrectly when posed in varying forms, highlighting significant gaps in models' reliability. Notably, models like GPT-4o tended to overestimate their mathematical abilities, while ChatGPT-4o demonstrated better decision-making and performance through effective tool usage. We evaluated eight state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) using DIA-Bench, showing that current models struggle with complex tasks and often display unexpectedly low confidence, even with simpler questions. The DIA framework sets a new standard for assessing not only problem-solving but also a model's adaptive intelligence and ability to assess its own limitations. The dataset is publicly available on our project's website.

Do Neutral Prompts Produce Insecure Code? FormAI-v2 Dataset: Labelling Vulnerabilities in Code Generated by Large Language Models

This study provides a comparative analysis of state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs), analyzing how likely they generate vulnerabilities when writing simple C programs using a neutral zero-shot prompt. We address a significant gap in the literature concerning the security properties of code produced by these models without specific directives. N. Tihanyi et al. introduced the FormAI dataset at PROMISE '23, containing 112,000 GPT-3.5-generated C programs, with over 51.24% identified as vulnerable. We expand that work by introducing the FormAI-v2 dataset comprising 265,000 compilable C programs generated using various LLMs, including robust models such as Google's GEMINI-pro, OpenAI's GPT-4, and TII's 180 billion-parameter Falcon, to Meta's specialized 13 billion-parameter CodeLLama2 and various other compact models. Each program in the dataset is labelled based on the vulnerabilities detected in its source code through formal verification using the Efficient SMT-based Context-Bounded Model Checker (ESBMC). This technique eliminates false positives by delivering a counterexample and ensures the exclusion of false negatives by completing the verification process. Our study reveals that at least 63.47% of the generated programs are vulnerable. The differences between the models are minor, as they all display similar coding errors with slight variations. Our research highlights that while LLMs offer promising capabilities for code generation, deploying their output in a production environment requires risk assessment and validation.

LLMs in Web-Development: Evaluating LLM-Generated PHP code unveiling vulnerabilities and limitations

This research carries out a comprehensive examination of web application code security, when generated by Large Language Models through analyzing a dataset comprising 2,500 small dynamic PHP websites. These AI-generated sites are scanned for security vulnerabilities after being deployed as standalone websites in Docker containers. The evaluation of the websites was conducted using a hybrid methodology, incorporating the Burp Suite active scanner, static analysis, and manual checks. Our investigation zeroes in on identifying and analyzing File Upload, SQL Injection, Stored XSS, and Reflected XSS. This approach not only underscores the potential security flaws within AI-generated PHP code but also provides a critical perspective on the reliability and security implications of deploying such code in real-world scenarios. Our evaluation confirms that 27% of the programs generated by GPT-4 verifiably contains vulnerabilities in the PHP code, where this number -- based on static scanning and manual verification -- is potentially much higher. This poses a substantial risks to software safety and security. In an effort to contribute to the research community and foster further analysis, we have made the source codes publicly available, alongside a record enumerating the detected vulnerabilities for each sample. This study not only sheds light on the security aspects of AI-generated code but also underscores the critical need for rigorous testing and evaluation of such technologies for software development.

The FormAI Dataset: Generative AI in Software Security Through the Lens of Formal Verification

This paper presents the FormAI dataset, a large collection of 112,000 AI-generated compilable and independent C programs with vulnerability classification. We introduce a dynamic zero-shot prompting technique, constructed to spawn a diverse set of programs utilizing Large Language Models (LLMs). The dataset is generated by GPT-3.5-turbo and comprises programs with varying levels of complexity. Some programs handle complicated tasks such as network management, table games, or encryption, while others deal with simpler tasks like string manipulation. Every program is labeled with the vulnerabilities found within the source code, indicating the type, line number, and vulnerable function name. This is accomplished by employing a formal verification method using the Efficient SMT-based Bounded Model Checker (ESBMC), which performs model checking, abstract interpretation, constraint programming, and satisfiability modulo theories, to reason over safety/security properties in programs. This approach definitively detects vulnerabilities and offers a formal model known as a counterexample, thus eliminating the possibility of generating false positive reports. This property of the dataset makes it suitable for evaluating the effectiveness of various static and dynamic analysis tools. Furthermore, we have associated the identified vulnerabilities with relevant Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE) numbers. We make the source code available for the 112,000 programs, accompanied by a comprehensive list detailing the vulnerabilities detected in each individual program including location and function name, which makes the dataset ideal to train LLMs and machine learning algorithms.