Sandbagging Detection Failure Analysis Reviewer

AI Trainer Jobs; United States; Remote; USD 34,000 - 62,000; Part time

Job summary

AuraOne is seeking a remote contractor to review sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation prompts and responses. You will compare outputs, label edge cases, and provide structured feedback to retrain the model.

The role emphasizes rigorous rubric adherence, high attention to detail, and the ability to flag when prompts themselves create issues. This is a contract-based, remote US-eligible position.

Qualifications

• Prior evaluation, annotation, or human-rater experience on sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation or adjacent content.
• Clear written reasoning that names the issue and the rubric clause being applied.
• Strong attention to detail and the ability to flag when a prompt is the problem.

Responsibilities

• Evaluate sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation model outputs against a versioned rubric and assign severity tags.
• Compare paired responses and select the stronger answer with a written rationale.
• Label hallucinations, instruction-following failures, and unsafe content with structured tags.
• Capture ambiguous prompts and route them back to the program team for rubric updates.

Skills

Model evaluation

Rubric annotation

Severity tagging

Inter-rater calibration

Sandbagging

Job description

Sandbagging Detection Failure Analysis Reviewer is a remote evaluation track for reviewing sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation prompts and responses against AuraOne's quality rubric. Reviewers compare paired outputs, label edge cases, and write the kind of structured feedback the modeling team can use to retrain.

Category: Frontier Model Evaluation · Pay: Hourly rate confirmed after the interview process · Location: Remote — US-eligible · Contractor

Sandbagging Detection Failure Analysis Reviewer is a remote evaluation track for reviewing sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation prompts and responses against AuraOne's quality rubric.

About the role

Sandbagging Detection Failure Analysis Reviewer is a remote evaluation track for reviewing sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation prompts and responses against AuraOne's quality rubric. Reviewers compare paired outputs, label edge cases, and write the kind of structured feedback the modeling team can use to retrain.
AI data reviewers help turn sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation outputs into auditable labels, rationales, and regression cases for AuraOne Human Data.
Review frontier model outputs. Judge benchmark failures and calibrate other evaluators.

Responsibilities

• Evaluate sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation model outputs against a versioned rubric and assign severity tags for Sandbagging Detection Failure Analysis Reviewer assignments.
• Compare paired responses and pick the stronger answer with a written rationale.
• Label hallucinations, instruction-following failures, and unsafe content with structured tags.
• Capture ambiguous prompts and route them back to the program team for rubric updates.

Role details

Track Evaluation & annotation Work model Remote · Independent specialist contractor Compensation Hourly rate confirmed after the interview process. Eligible from US

What you should bring

• Prior evaluation, annotation, or human-rater experience on sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation or adjacent content for Sandbagging Detection Failure Analysis Reviewer work.
• Comfort applying multi-page rubrics consistently across long batches.
• Clear written reasoning that names the issue and the rubric clause being applied.
• Strong attention to detail and the ability to flag when a prompt itself is the problem.
• Reliable async availability for at least 10 hours per week.

Example tasks

• Compare two sandbagging detection failure analysis evaluation model responses to the same prompt and pick the stronger one with rationale.
• Tag an unsafe response with the correct policy category and severity.
• Audit a 50-row batch for rubric consistency and report drift to the program lead.
• Propose a rubric clarification after spotting a recurring failure mode.

Useful experience

• Background in linguistics, content moderation, or trust & safety review.
• Experience with inter-rater agreement metrics and calibration cycles.
• Domain expertise that lets you spot subject-matter errors automated checks miss.

Compensation and schedule

Hourly rate confirmed after the interview process.
Expected arrangement: contractor , with program-defined task volume and review pacing. Placement depends on current program demand and reviewer confirmation.

Skills used in matching

• Model output evaluation
• Rubric-based annotation
• Severity tagging
• Inter-rater calibration
• Sandbagging Detection Failure Analysis evaluation
• Frontier evaluation
• Rubric calibration
• Failure analysis
• Sandbagging
• Detection