Safeguards Analyst / IAEA or Euratom Inspector
About the work Mercor is assembling a panel of nuclear materials and safeguards experts to red-team frontier AI models.
- Pay
- Needs pay review: $65-$75 per task
- Location
- Remote
- Eligibility
- Remote, applicant location not specified
- Qualification difficulty
- Selective
How current is this information?
The public role and application path were checked. Details can still change; this is not an endorsement or guarantee.
- Platform
- Mercor
- Fit category
- General professional
- Listing/source checked
- Sep 15, 2026
- Inventory presence checked
- Sep 28, 2026
- Apply link checked
- Sep 15, 2026
Application
Continue to the current Mercor listing
Apply on MercorOpens the current Mercor page in a new tab. This may be a referral link, and Specialist AI Work may be paid if the platform credits it. That does not change the role's advertised pay or how roles are ordered here.
What this role involves
About the work Mercor is assembling a panel of nuclear materials and safeguards experts to red-team frontier AI models. The goal is to test whether a model can correctly judge the misuse potential of a technical request — answering legitimate questions fully while refusing genuinely dangerous ones. You will: Write challenging single-turn prompts in your domain, labelled across three levels: benign, dual-use, and adversarial. Evaluate the responses that come back against a defined policy standard, and judge whether each was handled correctly.
Write the reference answer — what a correct response looks like, and the technical reasoning for why. This domain lives on the dual-use line more than most. The same material-balance calculation that closes an inspector's account can be used to hide what is missing from it; the same fuel-cycle step that supplies a power reactor is the one a proliferation pathway runs through. A model that refuses a routine accountancy question is failing as badly as one that answers a question it shouldn't.
Drawing that line reliably is why we need practitioners rather than generalists. Background we're looking for We're looking for people who have verified nuclear material rather than read about it — inspection regimes, accountancy, and the judgment calls that come with an unresolved discrepancy. What matters most is being able to tell a routine professional question from one that's fishing for something else: the same material-balance figure that closes an account can be used to conceal a diversion.
You will be writing prompts that sit exactly on that line, then judging whether the model held it.
Examples of relevant backgrounds (ideally with red-teaming experience): IAEA, Euratom or state-system (SSAC/RSAC) inspector — inspection planning, verification, reporting Material accountancy — facility declarations, inventory change reports, MUF evaluation and resolution Additional Protocol implementation — declarations, complementary access, information analysis Safeguards instrumentation and containment/surveillance — NDA measurement, seals, unattended monitoring Safeguards-by-design work or safeguards policy analysis at a laboratory, regulator or ministry What this role demands beyond technical depth This is writing-intensive work.
Every judgment you make needs a written rationale that a non-specialist can follow. Prior technical writing, published research, or expert witness experience is a strong signal; please include a sample or link. You will also be reading and writing about misuse scenarios in your field for sustained periods. We brief experts on this in advance, and you can pause or step away at any point without penalty.
Before you apply Your work here will not involve, and must not draw on, classified or export-controlled information, or anything covered by an NDA or prepublication review obligation. If you hold such obligations you may still be a good fit; tell us in your application and we will scope the work accordingly.
Before you apply
Review the main fit signals and unresolved details before opening the platform.
Why it may fit
- Professionals whose experience matches the current Safeguards Analyst / IAEA or Euratom Inspector requirements.
- Applicants comfortable completing Mercor's role-specific assessment.
Check before applying
Reasons to pause
- You cannot meet the listing's stated remote or location eligibility.
- You need guaranteed acceptance, hours, or project duration.
Still to verify
- Review the official Mercor listing before applying. Requirements, screening, pay, hours, and project availability can change.
- The reviewed listing had limited public detail; check the current platform page for the full requirements.
- Confirm the current applicant-pay terms on the platform listing.
What to prepare
Role tools
Where these choices are saved
Save, Not for me, Compare, and application tracking remain in this browser.
Application tips
- Complete Mercor's role-specific application or assessment carefully.
- Review the current Mercor listing and its eligibility details before applying.