> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://hydroxai.mintlify.site/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Why Evaluation & Benchmarking?

> Comprehensively evaluate your AI model's capabilities — security, safety, accuracy, robustness, compliance, and performance — before and after deployment.

Shipping an AI model without evaluation is like deploying code without tests. Know Your AI provides a complete evaluation framework that tests every dimension of your model's capabilities — so you know exactly how it behaves before your users do.

## What you can evaluate

<CardGroup cols={3}>
  <Card title="Security" icon="shield-halved">
    Resistance to jailbreaks, prompt injection, data extraction, and system prompt leakage.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Safety" icon="helmet-safety">
    Harmful content generation, toxicity, violence, child safety, and illegal activity.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Accuracy" icon="bullseye">
    Factual correctness, hallucination detection, and ground-truth comparison.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Robustness" icon="shield">
    Stability under adversarial inputs, edge cases, and multilingual attacks.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Compliance" icon="scale-balanced">
    CCPA/CPRA, EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, and OWASP LLM Top 10 alignment.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Bias & Fairness" icon="balance-scale">
    Discriminatory outputs, stereotyping, and fairness across demographics.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## How it works

```
Datasets (Attack Prompts)
         │
         ▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│   Your AI Model         │  ← API, Streaming API, or Website chatbot
│   (any provider)        │
└────────────┬────────────┘
             │  Responses
             ▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│   LLM-as-Judge          │  ← gemini-2.0-flash or custom judge model
│   Scores each response  │
└────────────┬────────────┘
             │
             ▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│   Results & Reports     │
│   Security score        │
│   Per-prompt verdicts   │
│   Compliance analysis   │
│   Benchmarking data     │
└─────────────────────────┘
```

Every evaluation follows the same pipeline:

1. **Select datasets** — Choose from 50+ attack datasets covering 15+ attack methods, or upload your own
2. **Send prompts** — Each prompt is sent to your AI model (via API or browser automation)
3. **Judge responses** — An LLM judge scores each response for vulnerabilities
4. **Generate reports** — Security scores, per-prompt verdicts, compliance analysis, and trend data

## Three ways to run evaluations

<CardGroup cols={3}>
  <Card title="Dashboard" icon="browser" href="/eval-benchmark/dashboard-eval">
    Point-and-click evaluations with real-time console and visual results.
  </Card>

  <Card title="SDK" icon="code" href="/eval-benchmark/sdk-eval">
    Programmatic evaluations for CI/CD pipelines and custom workflows.
  </Card>

  <Card title="CLI" icon="terminal" href="/eval-benchmark/cli-eval">
    Run evaluations from your terminal with a single command.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>

## Evaluation modes

Know Your AI supports two evaluation modes depending on how your AI is deployed:

### Model Evaluation (API Mode)

For AI models exposed via REST or streaming APIs. Know Your AI sends attack prompts directly to your API endpoint and collects responses.

* High-throughput testing with large datasets
* Supports REST API, streaming API, and custom schemas
* Ideal for pre-deployment benchmarking

### Chatbot Evaluation (Website Mode)

For AI chatbots deployed on websites. Know Your AI uses a browser control agent to interact with your chatbot like a real user.

* Full end-to-end testing including UI behavior
* Screenshot capture at every step for visual evidence
* Live viewer to watch the evaluation in real time

## Attack coverage

Know Your AI evaluates across **7 core attack categories** using **15+ attack methods**:

| Category             | Attack methods                               | What it tests                                                    |
| -------------------- | -------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Jailbreak**        | DAN, GCG, PAIR, GRANDMOTHER, DEEP\_INCEPTION | Can the model be tricked into ignoring safety rules?             |
| **Prompt Injection** | CIPHER, ARTPROMPT, ADAPTIVE                  | Can instructions be injected via user input?                     |
| **Data Extraction**  | DRA, RENELLM                                 | Can the model be forced to leak system prompts or training data? |
| **Harmful Content**  | PSYCHOLOGY, GPTFUZZER                        | Does the model generate dangerous or illegal content?            |
| **PII Leakage**      | MULTILINGUAL, PAST\_TENSE                    | Does the model expose personal information?                      |
| **Bias**             | ADAPTIVE, MULTILINGUAL                       | Does the model produce discriminatory outputs?                   |
| **Hallucination**    | DRA, PAIR                                    | Does the model fabricate false information?                      |

## Benchmarking across dimensions

Run evaluations across multiple dimensions to build a complete picture of your model:

| Dimension          | Metrics                                  | Why it matters                                     |
| ------------------ | ---------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------- |
| **Security score** | % of attack prompts blocked              | How resistant is the model to adversarial attacks? |
| **Safety score**   | % of harmful outputs prevented           | Does the model avoid generating dangerous content? |
| **Accuracy**       | Ground-truth match rate                  | Does the model give correct answers?               |
| **Robustness**     | Performance under adversarial variations | Does the model hold up under unusual inputs?       |
| **Compliance**     | Violation count per regulation           | Does the model meet regulatory requirements?       |
| **Consistency**    | Score variance across runs               | Are results stable and reproducible?               |

## Next steps

<CardGroup cols={2}>
  <Card title="Dashboard evaluations" icon="browser" href="/eval-benchmark/dashboard-eval">
    Run your first evaluation from the dashboard.
  </Card>

  <Card title="SDK evaluations" icon="code" href="/eval-benchmark/sdk-eval">
    Automate evaluations programmatically.
  </Card>

  <Card title="CLI evaluations" icon="terminal" href="/eval-benchmark/cli-eval">
    Run evaluations from your terminal.
  </Card>

  <Card title="Attack datasets" icon="database" href="/eval-benchmark/attack-datasets">
    Browse all available attack methods and categories.
  </Card>
</CardGroup>
