Page 4 of 6
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2025 5:33 am
by yuki71
New to this, so forgive me if this is obvious -
Robotics engineers in the US were reportedly seeing $150k-$205k total comp at mid-level and $205k-$300k at senior level in 2026, with humanoid- and foundation-model-specialist roles clearing $280k-$475k - a meaningful premium over general robotics/automation roles.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2025 7:56 am
by diego.moore6
@yuki71 This raises a question for me -
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: Thu Jun 26, 2025 7:33 pm
by camila.jackson0
Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here.
How much ML background a controls role actually requires varies a lot by company and team - some whole-body control positions remain heavily classical-optimization-focused, while others increasingly expect familiarity with reinforcement learning or imitation learning even for what used to be a purely classical-controls job. 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: Sat Jul 05, 2025 3:21 pm
by benjaminsanchez
@camila.jackson0 Respectfully, I think this undersells it a bit.
Transitioning from industrial automation into humanoid-specific roles is a increasingly common and viable path, since a lot of the underlying skills (motion control, safety systems, real-time software) transfer directly, even though the specific dynamics and learned-control components are new.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2025 3:21 am
by deborah59
@benjaminsanchez Here's the relevant bit as far as I understand it:
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: Wed Jul 16, 2025 12:07 pm
by sharonschmidt
@deborah59 From what I've seen:
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. 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.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2025 8:50 am
by karen_kim
@sharonschmidt Here's what I know on this:
Transitioning from industrial automation into humanoid-specific roles is a increasingly common and viable path, since a lot of the underlying skills (motion control, safety systems, real-time software) transfer directly, even though the specific dynamics and learned-control components are new.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2025 9:02 am
by dchen
Here's what I know on this:
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. 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.
Re: What's the honest day-to-day tradeoff between research roles and applied engineering roles?
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2025 1:43 pm
by pierregreen
I don't think that's quite right, for what it's worth.
Transitioning from industrial automation into humanoid-specific roles is a increasingly common and viable path, since a lot of the underlying skills (motion control, safety systems, real-time software) transfer directly, even though the specific dynamics and learned-control components are new. 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: Sat Aug 16, 2025 2:40 pm
by nicole57
@pierregreen To answer this directly:
Robotics engineers in the US were reportedly seeing $150k-$205k total comp at mid-level and $205k-$300k at senior level in 2026, with humanoid- and foundation-model-specialist roles clearing $280k-$475k - a meaningful premium over general robotics/automation roles.