Experience:

Director Salary:

$75

• $90 per hour Job Details
• Key Responsibilities and Duties Review user requests in the nuclear and radiological domain and classify each as benign, dual use or adversarial Assess the responses three different models gave to the same request, marking each as safe or unsafe and documenting the reasoning Rank the three responses against one another on accuracy, safety framing and usefulness Write the reference answer the model should have given For dual use requests, document what makes the request sensitive, what legitimate purpose it serves, and who should be able to receive an answer Identify legitimate professional questions that models wrongly refuse, which carry the same weight as identifying dangerous content Detect incorrect physics, wrong units or activity figures, misleading risk statements and unsupported technical conclusions Apply project rubrics consistently and provide clear written rationale for every judgment Escalate ambiguous or high risk cases according to project guidelines Qualifications Needed Relevant degree in Nuclear Engineering, Physics, Health Physics, Radiation Science, Radiochemistry, Chemistry or a related field Minimum 5 years of professional experience in nuclear engineering, reactor physics, health physics, radiation safety, safeguards, nonproliferation, radiochemistry or nuclear regulatory work Background in one or more of the following: nuclear engineering and reactor physics, safeguards and nonproliferation including IAEA, NRC or equivalent and export control, health physics and radiation safety, radiochemistry, or military and government nuclear service Experience reviewing technical work against a standard, such as licensing, inspection or peer review, is a strong plus Prior AI red teaming, technical QA, policy review or rubric based evaluation experience is a strong plus Proven ability to judge whether technical content is accurate, safe and appropriately scoped, and to explain that judgment in precise written English Strong written English sufficient to produce detailed rationale and reference answers Reliable and self directed, able to deliver consistent quality in a remote contractor workflow Must be a citizen or resident of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand or the European Union A bit about us:•We are partnered with a fast growing AI data services company that builds the training and evaluation data behind many of the world's leading AI labs and foundation model developers.

They are assembling a small panel of nuclear and radiological professionals to audit how these models respond to sensitive questions in the field. The panel decides where a model should answer, where it should decline, and what a correct answer looks like. That judgment carries directly into how the models behave for every reactor engineer, health physicist, regulator and student who asks them a nuclear question. They operate remotely across time zones and build these panels around people who are actively practicing in the discipline. Why join us?

•

Selective Panel:

A small review group rather than an open annotation pool

Fully Remote, Flexible Hours:

Set your own schedule and volume across time zones

Keep Your Current Role:

Structured as supplemental work. No requirement to leave your position

Fix Over-Refusal, Not Just Misuse:

Legitimate professional questions that models wrongly decline are explicitly in scope and count as much as the dangerous ones Your Judgment Sets the

Standard:

You write the answer the model should have given

Work Inside Your Expertise:

Technical audit in your own discipline, not general purpose data work

Broad Eligibility:

Open across the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the EU #manufacturing #regulatory-compliance #risk-assessment #radiation-safety #radiochemistry #nuclear-engineering #health-physics #nuclear-safeguards #nonproliferation #tier6