Lead Software Engineer
Il y a 16 heures
Brussels, Brussels-Capital, Belgique
Virtusa
Temps plein
Gratuit avec email ou Google
Enregistrez cette offre et organisez votre recherche
Créez un compte gratuit pour enregistrer des offres d'emploi, créer des alertes et revenir à cette liste depuis votre tableau de bord.
Gratuit avec email ou Google
En continuant, vous acceptez nos Conditions d’utilisation & Politique de confidentialité.
The project
We are building a GenAI regulatory science co-pilot for regulatory submission
teams. It works like a virtual Health Authority reviewer. It extracts and assesses
regulatory risks, maps submission content to relevant regulatory guidance and
precedent, checks that key messages are supported by the underlying clinical data, and anticipates likely Health Authority questions.
This system directly informs regulatory submission strategy, so its outputs must be
accurate, grounded in cited sources, and traceable. We are hiring an experienced
contractor to build and run the evaluations for the system’s core reasoning engines,
working with regulatory affairs subject-matter experts (SMEs) and the product
engineering team.
What you will do
Build gold sets with SMEs: annotate regulatory and clinical documents with the expected outputs (for example, extracted risks, relevant guidance and precedent, and whether the data supports each key message).
Write the annotation guidelines, run adjudication, and measure inter-rater agreement.
Evaluate extraction: score risk extraction for precision, recall, and completeness, and compare successive engine versions against a baseline.
Evaluate retrieval and ranking: measure retrieval recall (Recall@K), ranking quality (MRR, nDCG), and question coverage when the engine retrieves regulatory guidance, precedent, and prior Health Authority interactions.
Evaluate grounding and traceability: build code-based checks that every finding traces through evidence and document back to a valid source and citation.
Detect fabricated guidance, fabricated precedent, and unsupported regulatory claims.
Evaluate reasoning with LLM judges: design and validate LLM-as-judge rubrics for regulatory relevance, evidence sufficiency, risk assessment, and explanation quality, calibrated against SME judgment.
Evaluate each pipeline stage: create evaluation datasets and baselines for each stage of a multi-stage engine (evidence structuring, question coverage, retrieval, ranking, mapping, grounding), plus an end-to-end review with SMEs.
Report and harden: turn failure analysis into clear readouts for the product team, and package the evaluations as regression suites that run in CI/CD.