Page 2 of 6
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2025 5:03 pm
by zoeanderson
Appreciate the detailed answer.
Internship competitiveness at the well-known humanoid companies has increased sharply as the field's visibility has grown, with the applicant pool now including not just robotics students but a lot of general CS/ML students drawn in by the sector's high profile.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2025 6:04 pm
by cynthia.muller
@zoeanderson I don't think that's quite right, for what it's worth.
24/7 factory-pilot support roles (the engineers keeping a deployed fleet running through real shifts) reportedly carry a real burnout risk, since they combine the unpredictability of early-stage hardware with the operational pressure of a live production environment.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2025 1:18 pm
by deborah59
Pretty much this. One thing to add:
A field-deployment or reliability engineer's day-to-day work leans much more toward diagnosing real-world failure patterns, managing spare-parts logistics, and working directly with the customer site than toward algorithm development - a genuinely different role than a lot of new grads expect going in.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2025 8:10 am
by chenperez
@deborah59 I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified.
Companies like Figure, 1X, Apptronik, and Agility Robotics are reportedly pulling senior ROS, controls, and learning engineers directly out of warehouse-automation and industrial-robotics roles - a sign of real talent competition between adjacent industries, not just fresh grads entering the field.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Sun Mar 16, 2025 1:06 pm
by mia.weber
@chenperez Can I ask a dumb follow-up -
A strong, well-documented personal project (even a modest DIY build or a solid simulation-based RL project) reportedly carries real weight in hiring for this field, partly because the field is young enough that a demonstrated hands-on track record can meaningfully substitute for a less-relevant formal credential. Companies like Figure, 1X, Apptronik, and Agility Robotics are reportedly pulling senior ROS, controls, and learning engineers directly out of warehouse-automation and industrial-robotics roles - a sign of real talent competition between adjacent industries, not just fresh grads entering the field.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2025 3:45 pm
by deborahperez
Genuine beginner question -
24/7 factory-pilot support roles (the engineers keeping a deployed fleet running through real shifts) reportedly carry a real burnout risk, since they combine the unpredictability of early-stage hardware with the operational pressure of a live production environment. A commonly cited skill gap in new-grad applicants is practical systems integration experience - many candidates are individually strong in ML or in mechanical design, but comparatively few have hands-on experience getting perception, planning, and control to work together reliably on real hardware under time pressure.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2025 12:36 pm
by jwang
@deborahperez This raises a question for me -
A commonly cited skill gap in new-grad applicants is practical systems integration experience - many candidates are individually strong in ML or in mechanical design, but comparatively few have hands-on experience getting perception, planning, and control to work together reliably on real hardware under time pressure. A whole-body control engineer's day-to-day work is a mix of formulating and tuning constrained optimization problems, debugging why a controller behaves differently on hardware than in simulation, and a surprising amount of time spent on numerical stability and solver performance rather than pure algorithm design.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2025 7:59 pm
by karen.chen3
Just to be precise about one thing:
The common academic path into this field is a master's or conversion course in robotics or machine learning, followed by an internship or research role at a known lab or company - a PhD is common but increasingly not strictly required for industry roles, especially on the applied engineering side.
Kind of makes me think about how different this all looked even three years ago.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2025 3:12 pm
by dubois35
@karen.chen3 Not sure I fully agree here.
RSS (Robotics: Science and Systems), ICRA, and the IEEE-RAS Humanoids conference are commonly cited as the most directly relevant venues for someone specifically interested in legged locomotion and humanoid control research, as opposed to broader AI/ML conferences. In the UK, base salaries for robotics roles reportedly range from around £50,000 for new graduates up to roughly £200,000 for senior whole-body-control or reinforcement-learning specialists - a notably wide band reflecting how specialized the top end of the field has become.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Fri Apr 04, 2025 1:42 pm
by scott21
Slight correction, though the overall point stands:
A field-deployment or reliability engineer's day-to-day work leans much more toward diagnosing real-world failure patterns, managing spare-parts logistics, and working directly with the customer site than toward algorithm development - a genuinely different role than a lot of new grads expect going in.