You will review AI-generated answers to CRISPR and gene-editing prompts. Your evaluations will focus on scientific accuracy, safety relevance, and whether the responses handle sensitive biological topics appropriately.
You will complete a defined set of annotation tasks during a one-week project window. Each decision requires written feedback and a clear explanation of your reasoning.
- Evaluate and annotate AI-generated responses about CRISPR and gene editing.
- Identify inaccurate descriptions or misrepresentations of gene-editing techniques.
- Assess biosecurity concerns, dual-use risks, and the handling of sensitive biological topics.
- Provide structured feedback and a clear rationale for each evaluation decision.
What it pays and takes
This is a remote, asynchronous, project-based contractor engagement.
- $100 per hour.
- Approximately 10 to 20 hours per week over one week.
- Remote; open to candidates in the countries listed for the project.
- Professional fluency in English.
- Current enrollment in or completion of a PhD at Year 2 or later, or enrollment in or completion of a Master's program, in a relevant field such as genetics, molecular biology, cell biology, synthetic biology, computational biology, bioengineering, microbiology, virology, or biomedical engineering.
- At least two years of hands-on CRISPR or gene-editing bench experience.
- Proficiency with CRISPR/Cas9, Cas12, and Cas13 systems.
- Experience with gRNA design tools such as Benchling, CRISPick, or CHOPCHOP.
- Experience with cell-line work and off-target analysis methods such as CIRCLE-seq or GUIDE-seq.
- Familiarity with dual-use research of concern or biosecurity is valuable.
- Helpful experience includes therapeutic or disease-focused CRISPR work, base or prime editing, gene drives, biosafety policy, BSL-2+ laboratory environments, or Python or R for bioinformatics and sequence analysis.
How it works
Apply on OpenTrain with your resume, then complete the application on the hiring site.
About AI training work
AI training work uses human judgment to improve how artificial intelligence responds, including reviewing answers for accuracy, safety, and quality. People with specialized knowledge are needed for difficult subjects such as gene editing because their feedback helps models handle technical and sensitive topics more responsibly.