Safety Validation Lead, Scenarios

About this role

Who we are

Atoms is building the machines that power the next era of progress.

Over the last decade, software has transformed the digital world. But the physical world, where food is made, minerals are mined, goods are moved, and industries are run, remains far less intelligent, far less efficient, and far more constrained. We’re changing that.

Atoms builds Physical AI— real-world robots for the industries that move civilization forward, starting with food, mining, and transport. Our systems are designed to understand, predict, and control the real world with precision, turning complex physical operations into something more reliable, more scalable, and more productive.

This work requires more than robotics. It requires deep integration across hardware, software, AI, operations, manufacturing, and real estate. We don’t just build machines in a lab. We deploy them into real environments, operate them, learn from them, and improve them until they work at scale.

We are roboticists, engineers, operators, and builders. We believe the next great technology companies will not only transform information, but the physical systems that shape everyday life.

If you want to work on hard problems with real-world impact, join us.

About the role

This role owns the safety-relevant scenarios we validate against. You will define what makes a scenario safety-relevant, build the catalog, and own the argument that it is sufficient.

The catalog draws from two sources that behave very differently. Log-based scenarios come from real events, real interactions, and real distributions, and they bring the problem of finding the few that matter inside a very large volume of ordinary driving. NCAP-based scenarios come from the crash-avoidance portions of published consumer test protocols: precisely specified, externally credible, and designed for a driver-assist framing that has to be adapted before it means anything for an automated platform. You will own both, and you will own the harder question of how they fit together into one coverage argument.

This is a technical individual contributor role. You will build the pipelines and write the analysis yourself, and the coverage position you take becomes part of the safety case.