English AI Evaluator (Remote)

Joblet-AI; India; Remote; INR 600,000 - 900,000; Full time

Job summary

Turing, based in San Francisco, invites you to join as an AI Quality Analyst evaluating a personalization feature for Gemini. The role blends creativity with rigorous analysis to assess grounding, integration, and helpfulness in model responses.

You will design prompts, evaluate outputs, and provide structured feedback from your own experiences. Ideal candidates will have strong English, data annotation experience, and the ability to work fully remotely across global time zones as part of a 4+

Qualifications

• BS/BA degree or equivalent in a relevant field.
• Experience in data annotation, AI quality evaluation, content moderation, or related role.
• Commitments: at least 4 hours per day and up to 40 hours per week with 4 hours overlap with PST.
• Engagement type: Contractor; Length: 3 months.

Responsibilities

• Designing and executing multi-turn conversational prompts that require the AI to utilize personal information and experiences.
• Evaluating model responses based on intent from the starting prompt, checking if personalization was appropriately applied.
• Analyzing responses for Grounding issues, ensuring claims about you are supported by evidence and not flawed inferences or hallucinations.
• Assessing Integration quality to ensure personal data is woven naturally into the response without robotic "overnarrating".
• Rigorously evaluating and stack-ranking two model responses side-by-side (SxS) to determine which is more helpful, easy to use, and enjoyable.
• Writing clear, defensible rationales for comparisons, explicitly referencing where issues or positive aspects occurred in the conversation.
• Extracting and verifying "Debug Info" from the model to confirm that chat summaries and data sources were properly utilized.
• Maintaining strict data hygiene by deleting evaluation conversations to prevent polluting future chat history.

Skills

English Proficiency

Personal Data Sources

Schedule Flexibility

Analytical Thinking

Prompt Engineering

Evaluation Acumen

Attention to Detail

Written Communication

Feedback

Communication

Independence

Tech Setup

Education

BS/BA degree or equivalent

Experience in data annotation/AI quality evaluation

Contractor engagement and 3 months length

Job description

• Role Type: Full-time
• Location: Remote

About Turing: Based in San Francisco, California, is the world's leading research accelerator for frontier AI labs and a trusted partner for global enterprises deploying advanced AI systems. supports customers in two ways: first, by accelerating frontier research with high-quality data, advanced training pipelines, plus top AI researchers who specialize in coding, reasoning, STEM, multilinguality, multimodality, and agents; and second, by applying that expertise to help enterprises transform AI from proof of concept into proprietary intelligence with systems that perform reliably, deliver measurable impact, and drive lasting results on the P&L.

Role Overview:

As an AI Quality Analyst, you will evaluate a new personalization feature for Gemini. You will assess how well the model uses information from your past Gemini conversations, Gmail, Google Search, and YouTube activity to make responses more relevant and helpful. This role requires a unique blend of creativity and analytical rigor. You will actively design prompts from the perspective of your own personal experiences. You will then use your analytical skills to assess the quality of the model's personalized responses, evaluating dimensions like Grounding, Integration, and Helpfulness.

Key Qualifications

1. 1. English Proficiency: Ability to read and write in English with a high degree of comp, as English is the focus language for this project.
2. 2. Personal Account Usage: Willingness to use your primary personal Google account (not a testing account) and enable personal data sources for a genuine assessment.
3. 3. Schedule Flexibility: Full-time availability in your local time zone is required. We are staffing a global, 24-hour operations team.
4. 4. Exceptional Analytical Thinking: Demonstrate ability to evaluate nuanced and ambiguous AI responses, specifically assessing personalization quality.
5. 5. Creative Prompt Engineering: Experience in designing creative, multi-turn starting prompts based on personal context to thoroughly test the model's capabilities.
6. 6. Strong Evaluation Acumen: Understanding of personalization concepts, including the ability to identify incorrect personalization, poor inferences, and forced connections.
7. 7. Meticulous Attention to Detail: The ability to review Side-by-Side (SxS) model responses and spot subtle differences in naturalness and overnarrating.
8. 8. Excellent Written Communication: Superior ability to write clear, concise, and structured rationales for model rankings, explicitly referencing specific turn numbers.
9. 9. Feedback: Ability to provide constructive feedback and detailed annotations.
10. 10. Communication: Excellent communication and collaboration skills.
11. 11. Independence: Self-motivated and able to work independently in a remote setting.
12. 12. Technical Setup: Desktop/Laptop set up with a good internet connection.

Description:

1. 1. In this role, you will be part of a dynamic team focused on evaluating the quality of personalized AI interactions. Your day-to-day work will involve:
2. 2. Designing and executing multi-turn conversational prompts (typically 1-5 turns) that require the AI to utilize your personal information and experiences.
3. 3. Evaluating model responses based on your intent from the starting prompt, checking if the personalization was appropriately applied.
4. 4. Analyzing responses for Grounding issues, ensuring claims about you are supported by evidence and not flawed inferences or hallucinations.
5. 5. Assessing Integration quality to ensure personal data is woven naturally into the response without robotic "overnarrating".
6. 6. Rigorously evaluating and stack-ranking two model responses side-by-side (SxS) to determine which is overall more helpful, easy to use, and enjoyable.
7. 7. Writing clear, defensible rationales for your comparisons, explicitly referencing where issues or positive aspects occurred in the conversation.
8. 8. Extracting and verifying "Debug Info" from the model to confirm that chat summaries and data sources were properly utilized.
9. 9. Maintaining strict data hygiene by deleting evaluation conversations to prevent them from polluting your future chat history.

Education & Experience

1. 1. BS/BA degree or equivalent experience in a relevant field (e.g., Policy, Law, Ethics, Linguistics, Journalism, Computer Science, or a related analytical field).
2. 2. Experience in data annotation, AI quality evaluation, content moderation, or a related role is strongly preferred.
3. 1. Commitments Required: at least 4 hours per day and upto 40 hours per week with 4 hours of overlap with PST.
4. 2. Engagement type: Contractor
5. 3. Engagement Length: 3 months

Evaluation Process -

1. 1. Shortlisted candidates will be sent a Job Interest Form.
2. 2. After the profile review, an assessment will be shared, which must be completed within 24 hours.
3. 3. Based on the assessment outcomes, shortlisted candidates will be contacted to discuss the pre-onboarding requirements.

What You'll Do

1. 1. Designing and executing multi-turn conversational prompts (typically 1-5 turns) that require the AI to utilize your personal information and experiences.
2. 2. Evaluating model responses based on your intent from the starting prompt, checking if the personalization was appropriately applied.
3. 3. Analyzing responses for Grounding issues, ensuring claims about you are supported by evidence and not flawed inferences or hallucinations.
4. 4. Assessing Integration quality to ensure personal data is woven naturally into the response without robotic "overnarrating".
5. 5. Rigorously evaluating and stack-ranking two model responses side-by-side (SxS) to determine which is overall more helpful, easy to use, and enjoyable.
6. 6. Writing clear, defensible rationales for your comparisons, explicitly referencing where issues or positive aspects occurred in the conversation.