Machine Learning Research Scientist, Evaluations

Scale AI · San Francisco, CA; Seattle, WA; New York, NY · Research · listed August 26, 2026

The shape of it

Seniority
Not stated
Where
Not stated
Stated pay
$180,600 – $225,750 USD
Requirements listed
3
Length
776 words

In the posting’s own words

Scale works with the industry's leading AI labs to provide high quality data and accelerate progress in GenAI research. We are looking for Research Scientists and Research Engineers with expertise in LLM post-training (SFT, RLHF, reward modeling) and evaluation. This role is on the evaluation pod within the GenAI Research Organization and will focus on building benchmarks and diagnosing model failure modes in both text and multimodal modalities.

What it asks for · 3

  • Ph.D. or Master's degree in Computer Science, Machine Learning, AI, or a related field.
  • Experience with post-training techniques such as RLHF, preference modeling, or instruction tuning, and with LLM evaluation or benchmark development.
  • Previous experience in a customer facing role.

Degree language

  • Ph.D. or Master's degree in Computer Science, Machine Learning, AI, or a related field.

Tools and skills named

Models & research
  • LLM4×
  • Reinforcement learning4×
  • Machine learning2×
  • Deep learning
  • Evaluations
  • Fine-tuning

Words the posting leans on

  • model6×
  • research6×
  • evaluation5×
  • failure4×
  • learning4×
  • llm4×
  • benchmarks3×
  • post-training3×
  • conferences2×
  • data2×
  • deep2×
  • development2×
  • engineers2×
  • experience2×
  • expertise2×
  • failure modes2×

Counted from the posting after the mission statement and the legal notices are set aside. The ones near the top are the ones a screener is looking for.

The posting, your resume, and the gaps between them. One click loads all three.

More open at Scale AI

every open role at Scale AI

How this page was made

An automated read of a public job posting, fetched August 30, 2026 and last changed by Scale AI on August 26, 2026. Every list above is pulled from the posting’s own sentences — nothing rewritten, nothing added, no judgment about the role or the company. Counts and seniority are read off the text by rule, so they can be wrong where the posting is unusual. The original is the only thing that binds. Openings close without warning; check the source before spending an evening on it.