Bias and fairness auditing
Review model outputs for demographic, cultural, regional, or topical bias to support fairer and more balanced AI behavior.
Stress-test models for bias, hallucinations, jailbreaks, toxic outputs, refusal errors and project-specific risks in Vietnamese contexts.
Red-team programs are aligned with your use case, policy framework, user population and highest-risk failure modes.
Review model outputs for demographic, cultural, regional, or topical bias to support fairer and more balanced AI behavior.
Assess model responses for factual grounding, consistency, overconfidence, unsupported claims, and reliability in knowledge-sensitive prompts.
Run project-specific safety test sets, red team prompts, policy checks, and evaluation scenarios based on your model’s use case and risk profile.
Evaluate how well your model resists attempts to bypass safety rules, manipulate instructions, or trigger unintended behavior.
Identify harmful, offensive, unsafe, or non-compliant outputs across direct responses, subtle language patterns, and risky content scenarios.
Test whether the model correctly refuses unsafe, unethical, sensitive, or out-of-scope requests while still responding helpfully when appropriate.
We prioritize realistic abuse paths, local language patterns and policy boundaries instead of generic safety prompts.
A controlled workflow turns adversarial testing into reproducible evidence and clear remediation priorities.
Align model access, policies, abuse cases, user groups and severity criteria.
Create adversarial prompts and local scenarios across target risks.
Run tests, review outputs and document reproducible failures.
Deliver severity findings, examples, recommendations and regression tests.
Share your product use case, safety policies and priority risks. We’ll propose a focused adversarial test plan.
Discuss a red-team pilot ↗