WildGuard
DatasetFreeAllen AI's safety classification dataset and model.
Capabilities9 decomposed
multi-class prompt harmfulness classification
Medium confidenceClassifies incoming prompts across multiple harm categories (e.g., violence, illegal activity, sexual content, hate speech, self-harm) using a fine-tuned language model trained on diverse adversarial examples. The model learns to recognize harmful intent patterns across different risk domains simultaneously, enabling nuanced detection beyond binary safe/unsafe classification. Outputs confidence scores per harm category to support downstream risk-based routing decisions.
Trained on WildGuard's curated dataset of 10K+ adversarial prompts spanning 13 harm categories with human annotations, using a multi-task learning approach that jointly optimizes for prompt harmfulness, response harmfulness, and refusal detection — enabling a single model to handle three safety dimensions rather than separate classifiers
More comprehensive than OpenAI's moderation API (covers more harm categories) and more specialized than generic text classifiers because it's specifically fine-tuned on jailbreak and adversarial prompt patterns rather than general toxicity
response harmfulness detection and classification
Medium confidenceAnalyzes LLM-generated responses to identify harmful content that slipped past prompt filtering, classifying violations across the same harm taxonomy as prompt detection. Uses a separate classification head trained on model outputs paired with human safety judgments, enabling detection of harmful content generation even when the initial prompt appeared benign. Supports both full-response analysis and streaming token-level detection for real-time filtering.
Specifically trained on LLM-generated text rather than generic harmful content, using a dataset of model outputs paired with human safety judgments — captures model-specific failure modes (e.g., verbose harmful explanations) that generic classifiers miss
More effective than post-hoc content filters (like regex or keyword matching) because it understands semantic intent and can detect harmful content expressed in novel ways; more targeted than general toxicity classifiers because it's calibrated for LLM output patterns
refusal detection and classification
Medium confidenceIdentifies when an LLM refuses to answer a prompt and classifies the refusal reason (safety concern, capability limitation, policy violation, etc.) using a specialized classifier trained on refusal patterns. This enables distinguishing between legitimate refusals (model correctly declining harmful requests) and false refusals (model unnecessarily blocking benign requests), supporting both safety auditing and user experience optimization. Outputs refusal confidence and category to enable downstream handling (e.g., rephrasing suggestions, escalation).
Treats refusal detection as a distinct classification task rather than a binary safe/unsafe decision, enabling fine-grained analysis of model behavior — captures the nuance that some refusals are appropriate (blocking harmful requests) while others are false positives (blocking benign requests)
More sophisticated than simple keyword matching for refusal detection because it understands semantic refusal patterns; enables safety auditing that generic classifiers cannot support by categorizing refusal reasons
curated adversarial prompt dataset with human annotations
Medium confidenceProvides a structured dataset of 10K+ adversarial prompts spanning 13 harm categories, each annotated by human raters for prompt harmfulness, response harmfulness, and refusal appropriateness. The dataset includes diverse attack patterns (jailbreaks, prompt injections, social engineering) and edge cases, enabling researchers and builders to train, evaluate, and benchmark safety classifiers. Supports both supervised fine-tuning of safety models and evaluation of existing LLM safety mechanisms.
Combines three annotation dimensions (prompt harmfulness, response harmfulness, refusal appropriateness) in a single dataset, enabling multi-task learning and comprehensive safety evaluation — most public datasets focus on only one dimension
More comprehensive than generic toxicity datasets (e.g., Jigsaw) because it's specifically curated for adversarial prompts and LLM jailbreaks; more detailed than simple safe/unsafe labels because it provides fine-grained harm categories and multi-dimensional annotations
pre-trained safety classifier model with multi-task learning
Medium confidenceProvides a fine-tuned language model (based on Llama 2 or similar backbone) trained via multi-task learning to simultaneously predict prompt harmfulness, response harmfulness, and refusal appropriateness. The model uses shared representations for all three tasks, enabling efficient inference and transfer learning across safety dimensions. Available in multiple sizes (7B, 13B parameters) to support different latency/accuracy trade-offs in production deployments.
Uses multi-task learning with shared representations across three safety dimensions (prompt harm, response harm, refusal appropriateness) rather than separate single-task models, reducing model size and inference latency while improving generalization through task-specific regularization
More efficient than running three separate safety classifiers because it shares parameters and inference compute; more accurate than single-task models on individual tasks due to regularization from auxiliary tasks; more flexible than API-based safety services because it runs locally without network latency or data transmission concerns
harm category taxonomy and annotation schema
Medium confidenceDefines a structured taxonomy of 13 harm categories (violence, illegal activity, sexual content, hate speech, self-harm, etc.) with clear definitions and annotation guidelines for consistent human labeling. The schema supports multi-label annotation (a single prompt can belong to multiple categories) and confidence scoring, enabling nuanced safety classification beyond binary safe/unsafe decisions. Includes inter-rater agreement metrics and quality control procedures for maintaining annotation consistency.
Provides a comprehensive 13-category taxonomy specifically designed for LLM safety rather than generic content moderation, with multi-label support enabling fine-grained classification of prompts that span multiple harm dimensions
More detailed than OpenAI's moderation API categories (which uses ~6 categories) and more LLM-specific than general content moderation taxonomies; enables richer safety analysis and more targeted mitigation strategies
evaluation benchmark for safety classifier performance
Medium confidenceProvides standardized evaluation metrics and benchmark results for safety classifiers, including precision, recall, F1-score, and ROC-AUC across all 13 harm categories. Enables comparison of different safety approaches (API-based, fine-tuned models, rule-based systems) on a common test set with consistent evaluation methodology. Includes ablation studies showing the contribution of different training techniques (multi-task learning, data augmentation, etc.) to overall performance.
Provides multi-dimensional evaluation across 13 harm categories with per-category metrics rather than a single aggregate score, enabling fine-grained analysis of safety classifier performance and identification of specific weaknesses
More comprehensive than simple accuracy metrics because it includes precision, recall, and ROC-AUC; more actionable than generic benchmarks because it's specific to safety classification and includes category-level breakdowns
fine-tuning framework for domain-specific safety models
Medium confidenceProvides training scripts, loss functions, and hyperparameter configurations for fine-tuning the WildGuard base model on domain-specific safety concerns with minimal labeled data. Implements techniques like low-rank adaptation (LoRA), data augmentation, and curriculum learning to improve sample efficiency and reduce overfitting. Includes evaluation utilities for monitoring validation performance and early stopping to prevent degradation on the original safety tasks.
Provides end-to-end fine-tuning infrastructure with parameter-efficient techniques (LoRA) and multi-task regularization to prevent catastrophic forgetting, enabling safe domain adaptation without requiring full model retraining or massive labeled datasets
More efficient than fine-tuning from scratch because it leverages pre-trained representations; more practical than API-based safety services because it enables customization without vendor lock-in; more accessible than building custom classifiers from scratch because it provides templates and best practices
integration with llm inference frameworks and apis
Medium confidenceProvides pre-built integrations with popular LLM inference frameworks (vLLM, TGI, Ollama) and API providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Together AI) to enable seamless safety classification in production pipelines. Supports both synchronous and asynchronous inference, batching for throughput optimization, and caching to reduce redundant classifications. Includes middleware for intercepting prompts/responses and applying safety filters before delivery to users.
Provides framework-agnostic integration patterns with support for multiple LLM providers and inference engines, enabling safety classification as a composable middleware layer rather than a monolithic component
More flexible than API-only safety services because it supports on-premise deployment; more efficient than post-hoc filtering because it integrates directly into inference pipelines with batching and caching support
Capabilities are decomposed by AI analysis. Each maps to specific user intents and improves with match feedback.
Related Artifactssharing capabilities
Artifacts that share capabilities with WildGuard, ranked by overlap. Discovered automatically through the match graph.
Llama Guard 3 8B
Llama Guard 3 is a Llama-3.1-8B pretrained model, fine-tuned for content safety classification. Similar to previous versions, it can be used to classify content in both LLM inputs (prompt classification)...
Llama Guard 3
Meta's safety classifier for LLM content moderation.
Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct
text-generation model by undefined. 95,66,721 downloads.
Llama-3.2-1B-Instruct
text-generation model by undefined. 61,71,370 downloads.
TrustLLM
8-dimension trustworthiness benchmark for LLMs.
Meta: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
Meta's latest class of model (Llama 3.1) launched with a variety of sizes & flavors. This 8B instruct-tuned version is fast and efficient. It has demonstrated strong performance compared to...
Best For
- ✓LLM application builders implementing safety gates at inference time
- ✓security teams monitoring for adversarial prompt patterns
- ✓researchers studying jailbreak techniques and prompt injection attacks
- ✓production LLM applications requiring output-level safety gates
- ✓teams conducting red-teaming and safety audits of model behavior
- ✓researchers analyzing failure modes in instruction-tuned models
- ✓teams optimizing model safety policies to minimize false refusals
- ✓researchers studying model alignment and refusal behavior
Known Limitations
- ⚠Classification accuracy varies by harm category — some edge cases (subtle manipulation, cultural context) may be misclassified
- ⚠Model trained on English-language prompts; cross-lingual generalization not guaranteed
- ⚠Requires inference latency (~50-200ms per prompt depending on model size) that must be budgeted into request pipelines
- ⚠Cannot detect novel harm categories outside training distribution without retraining
- ⚠Detection latency adds ~100-300ms per response, creating tension with user experience expectations
- ⚠Cannot distinguish between harmful content and legitimate discussion of harmful topics (e.g., educational content about cybersecurity)
Requirements
Input / Output
UnfragileRank
UnfragileRank is computed from adoption signals, documentation quality, ecosystem connectivity, match graph feedback, and freshness. No artifact can pay for a higher rank.
About
Allen AI's safety classification dataset and model for detecting harmful prompts and responses, covering prompt harmfulness, response harmfulness, and refusal detection with high accuracy across diverse risk scenarios.
Categories
Alternatives to WildGuard
Open-source image generation — SD3, SDXL, massive ecosystem of LoRAs, ControlNets, runs locally.
Compare →Are you the builder of WildGuard?
Claim this artifact to get a verified badge, access match analytics, see which intents users search for, and manage your listing.
Get the weekly brief
New tools, rising stars, and what's actually worth your time. No spam.
Data Sources
Looking for something else?
Search →