Benchmarks and Evaluation
We develop the science of LLM evaluation, setting the standard for rigorous assessment and identifying hidden risks before they matter.
> Abstract // Led by Prof. Adam Mahdi, our lab advances the science of AI evaluation, benchmarking, safety and security. Through rigorous empirical research, we study how LLMs and agentic systems reason, interact with humans and drive scientific discovery. We work with industry partners deploying AI where reliability matters.
We develop the science of LLM evaluation, setting the standard for rigorous assessment and identifying hidden risks before they matter.
From bias and toxicity to agentic misalignment, we study the full spectrum of AI risk and develop the technical and governance tools to address it.
We build agentic systems that automate scientific knowledge synthesis and discovery, with a focus on agents that are reliable, transparent and domain-grounded.
We run large-scale empirical studies on how people use AI for high stakes decisions, from healthcare and law to policy and beyond.
A benchmark that tells real navigation apart from stochastic search when agents work over document collections.
LLM self-explanations are usually dismissed as unreliable. Measured the right way, they predict model behavior.
A benchmark for whether web agents can be socially engineered into abandoning the user's task. Today's agents fall for it.
A preregistered randomized study in Nature Medicine on how reliably LLMs serve as medical assistants for the general public.
A construct-validity audit of widely-used LLM benchmarks: what they claim to measure versus what they capture.
How LLM judges degrade across languages, modalities, and domains, and where the failure modes sit.
Direct Preference Optimization reduces toxicity. We trace where it acts, neuron by neuron.
Ask an LLM "what would change your answer?" and it looks like introspection. It is often confabulation.
A survey of multimodal ML in clinical practice, from data-fusion strategies through to deployment.
A benchmark that obfuscates orthography to strip memorised knowledge out of reasoning problems, showing how much "reasoning" was recall.
> Hiring philosophy // OxRML is staffed in the proportion that should alarm a traditional VC: heavy concentration of DPhils, research engineers, and visiting fellows. The ratio of scientists to anything else is the point.

Adam leads OxRML. The group studies how language models reason, how people work with them, and how agentic systems behave on real scientific and decision-making tasks.
FK
DD
AM
YY
HM
JR
GP
KK
RO
SP
MK
SP
TN
JLThe hardest technical problems produce the most defensible products. If a competitor can replicate your evaluation stack in a hackathon, you have a feature, not a moat. We work with the organisations that understand the difference.
On-site sessions for product and ML teams on evaluation, safety, and agent reliability.
Half-day to multi-week formats. For teams shipping LLM products in healthcare, finance, retail, and government.
We work with engineering partners to turn lab work into tools other teams can run.
Evaluation harnesses, safety dashboards, agentic-research platforms. We build them with partners we trust, carrying the research methods through to the code.
Applied research collaborations with foundations, governments, and large companies.
Multi-year programmes: shared roadmaps, sponsored DPhil studentships, named labs.
New papers, open positions, partnership opportunities, and what we have been reading.