Toxicity text detectors can be vulnerable to adversarial examples - small perturbations to input text that fool the systems into wrong detection. Existing attack algorithms are time-consuming and often produce invalid or ambiguous adversarial examples, making them less useful for evaluating or improving real-world toxicity content moderators. This paper proposes an annotation pipeline for quality control of generated toxic adversarial examples (TAE). We design model-based automated annotation and human-based quality verification to assess the quality requirements of . Successful should fool a target toxicity model into making benign predictions, be grammatically reasonable, appear natural like human-generated text, and exhibit semantic toxicity. When applying these requirements to more than 20 state-of-the-art (SOTA) TAE attack recipes, we find many invalid samples from a total of 940k raw TAE attack generations. We then utilize the proposed pipeline to filter and curate a high-quality TAE dataset we call TaeBench (of size 264k). Empirically, we demonstrate that TaeBench can effectively transfer-attack SOTA toxicity content moderation models and services. Our experiments also show that TaeBench with adversarial training achieve significant improvements of the robustness of two toxicity detectors.

Assessing the factual consistency of automatically generated texts in relation to source context is crucial for developing reliable natural language generation applications. Recent literature proposes AlignScore which uses a unified alignment model to evaluate factual consistency and substantially outperforms previous methods across many benchmark tasks. In this paper, we take a closer look of datasets used in AlignScore and uncover an unexpected finding: utilizing a smaller number of data points can actually improve performance. We process the original AlignScore training dataset to remove noise, augment with robustness-enhanced samples, and utilize a subset comprising 10% of the data to train an improved factual consistency evaluation model, we call LIM-RA (Less Is More for Robust AlignScore). LIM-RA demonstrates superior performance, consistently outperforming AlignScore and other strong baselines like ChatGPT across four benchmarks (two utilizing traditional natural language generation datasets and two focused on large language model outputs). Our experiments show that LIM-RA achieves the highest score on 24 of the 33 test datasets, while staying competitive on the rest, establishing the new state-of-the-art benchmarks.