About Mercor: Synthetic / Process ChemistCompany: MercorCompensation: $65-$75 per taskCommitment: ContractLocation: RemoteReferral Reward: Earn up to $250 per successful referral.Referral Link: https://t.mercor.com/rSk1PAbout the work
Mercor is assembling a panel of chemistry and chemical safety 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 route design that scales a medicine underpins a controlled compound; the same impurity profile that proves a clean process identifies how something was made. A model that refuses a routine scale-up or kinetics 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 chemists who have actually run routes and scaled them — bench to pilot to plant — and who know which requests are ordinary process chemistry and which are asking for something else. What matters most is being able to tell a routine professional question from one that's fishing for something else: the same route knowledge that shortens a synthesis serves whoever is shortening it. 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):
Synthetic route design and development in pharmaceutical, agrochemical or fine chemicals
Process chemistry and reaction engineering — optimisation, kinetics, impurity control
Scale-up from bench to pilot to plant, with the safety review that goes with it
Precursor sourcing, controlled-substance registration or regulatory chemistry
Method development and troubleshooting in a GMP or equivalent quality environment
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.
We consider all qualified applicants without regard to legally protected characteristics and provide reasonable accommodations upon request.
About Mercor: Analytical ChemistCompany: MercorCompensation: $65-$75 per taskCommitment: ContractLocation: RemoteReferral Reward: Earn up to $250 per successful referral.Referral Link: https://t.mercor.com/5MwVIAbout the work
Mercor is assembling a panel of chemistry and chemical safety 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 method that detects a hazardous compound at trace level defines the threshold someone would try to stay beneath; the same library entry that identifies an unknown tells you what a screen will and won't see. A model that refuses a routine method-validation 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 analysts who have built and validated methods for hazardous compounds — people who know what a detection limit really means and what it implies. What matters most is being able to tell a routine professional question from one that's fishing for something else: the same detection method that finds a compound describes how to evade the screen. 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):
Detection and identification of hazardous compounds — GC-MS, LC-MS/MS, IR, NMR
Method development and validation for trace-level analysis
Environmental, occupational or emergency-response sampling and analysis
Reference standards, spectral libraries and unknown identification
Laboratory accreditation, QA/QC and proficiency testing
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.
We consider all qualified applicants without regard to legally protected characteristics and provide reasonable accommodations upon request.
About Mercor: Industrial Hygienist / Process Safety EngineerCompany: MercorCompensation: $65-$75 per taskCommitment: ContractLocation: RemoteReferral Reward: Earn up to $250 per successful referral.Referral Link: https://t.mercor.com/tQAayAbout the work
Mercor is assembling a panel of chemistry and chemical safety 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 dispersion model that sites a plant and sets an evacuation radius also predicts an exposure; the same hazard analysis that finds a failure path is a list of failure paths. A model that refuses a routine exposure-limit 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 assessed real exposures and real process hazards, and signed off on the controls. What matters most is being able to tell a routine professional question from one that's fishing for something else: the same release model that protects a community estimates a consequence. 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):
Certified industrial hygienist — exposure assessment, sampling strategy, control banding
Process hazard analysis — HAZOP, LOPA, what-if studies, management of change
Toxic release and dispersion modelling — consequence analysis, AEGL/ERPG criteria, facility siting
Ventilation, containment and PPE programme design for chemical hazards
Regulatory compliance — PSM, Seveso, COMAH, OSHA or national equivalents
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.
We consider all qualified applicants without regard to legally protected characteristics and provide reasonable accommodations upon request.
About Mercor: Forensic / Toxicological ChemistCompany: MercorCompensation: $65-$75 per taskCommitment: ContractLocation: RemoteReferral Reward: Earn up to $250 per successful referral.Referral Link: https://t.mercor.com/WdxBhAbout the work
Mercor is assembling a panel of chemistry and chemical safety 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 casework knowledge that identifies a substance describes how it was produced; the same precursor list that supports an investigation is a shopping list read backwards. A model that refuses a routine identification or casework 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 done casework — identifying substances and precursors, and defending the conclusion in a report or on the stand. What matters most is being able to tell a routine professional question from one that's fishing for something else: the same precursor knowledge that identifies a clandestine route is the route. 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):
Controlled substance casework in a forensic laboratory — identification and quantitation
Clandestine laboratory response, precursor identification and scene chemistry
Forensic toxicology — postmortem or human performance casework
Seized-drug and precursor trend monitoring or intelligence analysis
Expert testimony and report writing on chemical casework
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.
We consider all qualified applicants without regard to legally protected characteristics and provide reasonable accommodations upon request.
About Mercor: Stanford Youth Study — US Parents & Kids (Age 9–13)Company: MercorCompensation: $110,Commitment: Talent networkLocation: Remote (United States)Referral Link: https://t.mercor.com/YQTwmLocation requirementsUnited StatesMercor is recruiting participants for the Youth Well-being Project, a research study led by Stanford University in collaboration with Bocconi University, focused on how smartphones and digital tools affect children and families.
📋 Applications are open now. We're accepting applications at this stage to finalize and confirm participants for the upcoming batch, which begins in January. Apply now to lock in your spot — selected applicants will have their place confirmed ahead of the January start.
✅ Who can take part — please read carefully
You are a parent/guardian based in the United States
You have a child aged 9–13
Your child has their own smartphone with an active SIM card (a working phone number). This is required — the study involves installing an app on the child's phone, so a tablet, Wi‑Fi‑only device, or a phone without a SIM will not qualify.
You and your child are willing to take part together
You can pick one child to take part with you — one child per household.
What you'll be asked to do
Complete a few short online surveys plus occasional text-message check-ins across the study
Install a parental-control app on your child's phone and keep it installed for the study period
Your child completes two short online surveys and a few text-message check-ins
Engagement details
Start: January (applications are being finalized now)
Format: Remote — online surveys + short text-message check-ins
Time commitment: The study runs over ~8 weeks. Active time is light — the surveys are short and the app simply stays installed on your child's phone during that period, with a few quick check-ins along the way
Compensation: A flat fee of $110, paid once on completion
Participation: One child per household
Why participate
Contribute to Stanford + Bocconi research on children's well-being in the digital age
Help parents make more informed decisions about technology
Flexible, remote participation
We consider all qualified applicants without regard to legally protected characteristics and provide reasonable accommodations upon request.Contract and Payment Terms
You will be engaged as an independent contractor.
This is a fully remote role that can be completed on your own schedule.
Projects can be extended, shortened, or concluded early depending on needs and performance.
Your work at Mercor will not involve access to confidential or proprietary information from any employer, client, or institution.
Payments are weekly on Stripe or Wise based on services rendered.
Please note: We are unable to support H1-B or STEM OPT candidates at this time.
About Mercor
Mercor partners with leading AI labs and enterprises to train frontier models using human expertise. You will work on projects that focus on training and enhancing AI systems. You will be paid competitively, collaborate with leading researchers, and help shape the next generation of AI systems in your area of expertise.
