Associate Embedded Software Engineer
MITRE · Bedford, MA · 3 wk ago
Information Technology$89k–$112k/yrFull-time
We need to output HTML fragment with headings for sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections where posting has real specific content.
We need to parse the posting.
First, there is a lot of introductory text about MITRE, department summary. That could be "About the role" maybe.
We need to avoid repeating job title as heading (not present). No Job ID.
We need to use
for sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections where posting has real specific content.
We need to parse the posting.
First, there is a lot of introductory text about MITRE, department summary. That could be "About the role" maybe.
We need to avoid repeating job title as heading (not present). No Job ID.
We need to use - for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and
for prose.
We must preserve all substantive info, not invent or summarize away detail. Remove boilerplate: cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions.
We need to include sections only when posting has real specific content.
Let's extract content:
- About the role: The introductory paragraphs describing MITRE, department summary, mission, etc. Could be considered about the role. We'll put that in
About the role
with paragraphs.
- Responsibilities: There's a "Roles & Responsibilities:" section with bullet points (Key opportunities include: ...). Those are responsibilities. We'll list them as
- .
- Requirements: There's "Basic Qualifications:" with bullet list. Those are requirements. We'll put under
Requirements
.
- Qualifications: There's "Preferred Qualifications:" bullet list. Could be under Qualifications
(or maybe Skills). The instruction says we can have sections like Qualifications, Skills. We need to decide mapping. Probably Basic Qualifications -> Requirements, Preferred Qualifications -> Qualifications. Skills maybe from Preferred Qualifications? But we can also put Skills separate if there is explicit skills list. The posting includes many skill items in Preferred Qualifications (e.g., familiarity with OOP, etc.). Could treat those as Skills. But we have to avoid thin sections. Perhaps combine Preferred Qualifications into Qualifications section. Or we could have Qualifications (Preferred) and Skills (some of them). However instruction: "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So better to have maybe three sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements (including both basic and preferred). But they said we can have Qualifications and Skills sections. We need to include a section only when posting has real specific content for it. We have content for Basic Qualifications and Preferred Qualifications. Could combine them under Requirements (or Qualifications). Let's decide: Use "Requirements" for Basic Qualifications (mandatory). Use "Qualifications" for Preferred Qualifications (nice-to-have). That seems reasonable.
Skills: Could be derived from Preferred Qualifications but we already have Qualifications. Might not need separate Skills.
Benefits: The posting mentions "competitive benefits, meaningful career development, and a culture of innovation..." but not specific benefits list. There's a line: "Benefits information may be found here." No specific benefits listed. So we should NOT create Benefits section because no specific content.
Pay: There's "Salary compensation range and midpoint: $89,200 - $111,500 - $133,800". That's specific pay info. So we need a Pay section.
Schedule: There's "This position requires a minimum of 4 days a week on-site at our Bedford, MA facility." Also "Annual Work Location Type: Onsite". So schedule info: onsite, 4 days/week. That's specific. So we can include Schedule section.
We also have clearance info: "Applicants selected for this position will be subject to a US government security investigation and must be able to obtain and maintain a Department of Defense SECRET clearance, which requires US citizenship". Also "This requisition requires the hired candidate to have or obtain, within one year from the date of hire, the following clearance(s): Secret". That's also a requirement (maybe under Requirements). Could include in Requirements.
Also "In addition, candidates must meet requirements to support project work onsite in our labs and classified facilities on the Bedford Campus". That's also requirement.
We need to preserve all substantive info. So we need to include those details.
We must not include boilerplate like "It is unlawful in Massachusetts to require or administer a lie detector test..." etc. That's legal boilerplate; remove.
Also remove EEO statement, commitment to non-discrimination, accessibility, copyright, etc.
Also remove "Apply for this position!" etc.
Now craft HTML.
Structure:
About the role
...
Maybe multiple paragraphs.
We need to keep the content exactly as in posting but we can reformat into paragraphs. Must not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to keep all substantive sentences.
Let's extract About the role content:
From start: "At MITRE, your passion fuels work that impacts our nation and improves lives. This is where your skills strengthen national security, cybersecurity, health, transportation, and citizen services. We’re a nonprofit engineering, applied research, and advanced technology organization working in the public interest. With objectivity and integrity at our core, we lead federally funded research and development centers for U.S. government agencies – collaborating with industry and academia to deliver integrated, high-impact solutions that advance our nation’s health, security, and prosperity. Our people tackle the toughest technical challenges, supported by competitive benefits, meaningful career development, and a culture of innovation, collaboration, and technical excellence. Choose MITRE for a career with purpose — and help shape the future. Department Summary: Would you like to join a team of world class researchers and engineers commencing Summer of 2026 collectively focused on developing systems critical to national security?. Are you seeking an opportunity to work in an environment where big ideas, sound technical arguments and sponsor impacts are valued?. Then MITRE might be the place for you! At MITRE, we believe that good ideas lead to great solutions through testing, exploration, development, and demonstration. In MITRE's Electronic System Development department, we apply this principle as we dig deep into hard problems to find innovative, practical ways to solve tough challenges for a variety of government sponsors across a range of technical applications. We are currently seeking entry-level candidates to grow our team, specifically those with experience implementing embedded software on SoC or other embedded platforms. As part of our team, you will have the opportunity to design and implement technical solutions for a wide range of challenges currently faced by our government sponsors. We specialize in rapid prototyping of advanced sensor, communication and navigation systems on real-time embedded platforms. As an applied research organization, we focus on capability development and demonstration while remaining decoupled from protracted product lifecycles and system support roles. Our world class labs provide a canvas for our team to conduct hands-on research and develop tangible solutions to support our military leaders and reinforce our nation’s defense. If this sounds interesting to you, then we would love to speak with you."
We need to remove the "Apply for this position!" line later.
We'll keep all that as prose, maybe split into paragraphs for readability but not required. We'll keep as one maybe too long but okay.
Now Responsibilities: Under "Roles & Responsibilities:" then bullet list:
"Key opportunities include:
- Working on cross-disciplinary teams of similarly bright and motivated engineers on projects of national importance
- Real-time communication and sensor systems leveraging state of the art processors, FPGA & SoC technology and cutting-edge SDR platforms
- Advanced architectures for high throughput signal processing
- Low size, weight, power and cost (SWaP-C), highly integrated custom platforms
- A supportive culture of learning, professional growth, and development
- Opportunities to build on skills and work on a diverse range of projects
- Outstanding continuing education programs"
We need to preserve each bullet as
- .
Now Requirements (Basic Qualifications):
"Typically requires less than 1 year of related experience with a related Bachelor’s degree, or equivalent combination of related education and work experience.
A Bachelor’s degree in Computer Engineering, Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, or an equivalent combination of related education and work experience.
Strong oral and written communication skills.
Proficiency in C and/or C++ programming languages.
Familiarity with good software development practices, including: approaches to design, implementation, testing, documentation, and debugging.
Understanding of embedded systems and hardware/software interaction.
Basic knowledge of low-level processor architectures, operating system concepts, and hardware interfacing.
Applicants selected for this position will be subject to a US government security investigation and must be able to obtain and maintain a Department of Defense SECRET clearance, which requires US citizenship
In addition, candidates must meet requirements to support project work onsite in our labs and classified facilities on the Bedford Campus
This position requires a minimum of 4 days a week on-site at our Bedford, MA facility."
Note: The last line about 4 days a week on-site is also schedule info; but we might duplicate. We'll keep it in Requirements as it's a requirement, but also we have Schedule section. To avoid duplication, we could keep schedule info only in Schedule section and not repeat in Requirements. However the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we can include it in both sections? That would be duplication. Better to place it in Schedule section and mention in Requirements maybe as "onsite requirement" but we could note that it's covered elsewhere. However to preserve all info, we need to ensure it's present somewhere. We'll put it in Schedule section and also maybe mention in Requirements as "Onsite work requirement (see Schedule)". But that might be summarizing. Safer to include it in both sections? The instruction says do not invent or summarize away detail. Duplication is not prohibited explicitly, but they said remove duplicated lines. That refers to duplicated lines in the source. Duplicating content ourselves might be okay but could be considered unnecessary. I'd rather include it in Schedule section and not repeat in Requirements; but then the requirement about 4 days on-site would be missing from Requirements section. However the requirement is also a schedule detail; we could treat it as schedule, not a requirement. The Basic Qualifications list includes that line; but we could treat it as part of Requirements but also note schedule. I'd include it in Requirements as a requirement, and also include Schedule section with same info? That would be duplication but maybe acceptable. However they said "remove duplicated lines" meaning from the source, not our own duplication. I think it's okay to have it in both sections if we want to preserve all info. But to be safe, I'll include it in Requirements and also in Schedule (maybe rephrase). But we need to avoid "filler/placeholder text". It's not filler.
Let's decide: Keep the 4 days on-site in Requirements (as it's a requirement). Then Schedule section can mention "Onsite work location type: Onsite" and maybe "Minimum 4 days per week on-site at Bedford, MA facility". That's still specific but duplicates. Might be okay.
Alternatively, we could move the 4 days line to Schedule and remove from Requirements. But then we lose that requirement from Requirements section. However the requirement is about onsite presence; it's still a requirement. But we could still mention "Onsite work requirement" in Requirements without repeating the exact line. That would be summarizing? Not exactly; we could say "Must be able to work onsite at Bedford, MA facility (minimum 4 days per week)". That's still specific but rephrased. Might be considered summarizing but not inventing. Safer to keep original line in Requirements and also include Schedule with same info? Might be considered duplication but not from source. I'll risk it.
Now Qualifications (Preferred):
List:
"M.S. in Computer Engineering, Computer Science, Electrical Engineering or similar field
Active Secret Clearance
Familiarity with object-oriented programming principles and working knowledge of one or more higher-level languages such as Python, MATLAB, or Perl.
Exposure to modern reconfigurable SoC platforms (AMD Xilinx MPSoC, RFSoC, Versal, or Intel Agilex SoC)
Familiarity with common software development tools (e.g., Git, Make, CMake).
Understanding of development best practices including code reviews, regression testing, and user documentation.
for prose. We must preserve all substantive info, not invent or summarize away detail. Remove boilerplate: cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. We need to include sections only when posting has real specific content. Let's extract content: - About the role: The introductory paragraphs describing MITRE, department summary, mission, etc. Could be considered about the role. We'll put that in
About the role
withparagraphs. - Responsibilities: There's a "Roles & Responsibilities:" section with bullet points (Key opportunities include: ...). Those are responsibilities. We'll list them as
- .
- Requirements: There's "Basic Qualifications:" with bullet list. Those are requirements. We'll put under
Requirements
. - Qualifications: There's "Preferred Qualifications:" bullet list. Could be underQualifications
(or maybe Skills). The instruction says we can have sections like Qualifications, Skills. We need to decide mapping. Probably Basic Qualifications -> Requirements, Preferred Qualifications -> Qualifications. Skills maybe from Preferred Qualifications? But we can also put Skills separate if there is explicit skills list. The posting includes many skill items in Preferred Qualifications (e.g., familiarity with OOP, etc.). Could treat those as Skills. But we have to avoid thin sections. Perhaps combine Preferred Qualifications into Qualifications section. Or we could have Qualifications (Preferred) and Skills (some of them). However instruction: "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So better to have maybe three sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements (including both basic and preferred). But they said we can have Qualifications and Skills sections. We need to include a section only when posting has real specific content for it. We have content for Basic Qualifications and Preferred Qualifications. Could combine them under Requirements (or Qualifications). Let's decide: Use "Requirements" for Basic Qualifications (mandatory). Use "Qualifications" for Preferred Qualifications (nice-to-have). That seems reasonable. Skills: Could be derived from Preferred Qualifications but we already have Qualifications. Might not need separate Skills. Benefits: The posting mentions "competitive benefits, meaningful career development, and a culture of innovation..." but not specific benefits list. There's a line: "Benefits information may be found here." No specific benefits listed. So we should NOT create Benefits section because no specific content. Pay: There's "Salary compensation range and midpoint: $89,200 - $111,500 - $133,800". That's specific pay info. So we need a Pay section. Schedule: There's "This position requires a minimum of 4 days a week on-site at our Bedford, MA facility." Also "Annual Work Location Type: Onsite". So schedule info: onsite, 4 days/week. That's specific. So we can include Schedule section. We also have clearance info: "Applicants selected for this position will be subject to a US government security investigation and must be able to obtain and maintain a Department of Defense SECRET clearance, which requires US citizenship". Also "This requisition requires the hired candidate to have or obtain, within one year from the date of hire, the following clearance(s): Secret". That's also a requirement (maybe under Requirements). Could include in Requirements. Also "In addition, candidates must meet requirements to support project work onsite in our labs and classified facilities on the Bedford Campus". That's also requirement. We need to preserve all substantive info. So we need to include those details. We must not include boilerplate like "It is unlawful in Massachusetts to require or administer a lie detector test..." etc. That's legal boilerplate; remove. Also remove EEO statement, commitment to non-discrimination, accessibility, copyright, etc. Also remove "Apply for this position!" etc. Now craft HTML. Structure:About the role
...
Maybe multiple paragraphs. We need to keep the content exactly as in posting but we can reformat into paragraphs. Must not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to keep all substantive sentences. Let's extract About the role content: From start: "At MITRE, your passion fuels work that impacts our nation and improves lives. This is where your skills strengthen national security, cybersecurity, health, transportation, and citizen services. We’re a nonprofit engineering, applied research, and advanced technology organization working in the public interest. With objectivity and integrity at our core, we lead federally funded research and development centers for U.S. government agencies – collaborating with industry and academia to deliver integrated, high-impact solutions that advance our nation’s health, security, and prosperity. Our people tackle the toughest technical challenges, supported by competitive benefits, meaningful career development, and a culture of innovation, collaboration, and technical excellence. Choose MITRE for a career with purpose — and help shape the future. Department Summary: Would you like to join a team of world class researchers and engineers commencing Summer of 2026 collectively focused on developing systems critical to national security?. Are you seeking an opportunity to work in an environment where big ideas, sound technical arguments and sponsor impacts are valued?. Then MITRE might be the place for you! At MITRE, we believe that good ideas lead to great solutions through testing, exploration, development, and demonstration. In MITRE's Electronic System Development department, we apply this principle as we dig deep into hard problems to find innovative, practical ways to solve tough challenges for a variety of government sponsors across a range of technical applications. We are currently seeking entry-level candidates to grow our team, specifically those with experience implementing embedded software on SoC or other embedded platforms. As part of our team, you will have the opportunity to design and implement technical solutions for a wide range of challenges currently faced by our government sponsors. We specialize in rapid prototyping of advanced sensor, communication and navigation systems on real-time embedded platforms. As an applied research organization, we focus on capability development and demonstration while remaining decoupled from protracted product lifecycles and system support roles. Our world class labs provide a canvas for our team to conduct hands-on research and develop tangible solutions to support our military leaders and reinforce our nation’s defense. If this sounds interesting to you, then we would love to speak with you." We need to remove the "Apply for this position!" line later. We'll keep all that as prose, maybe split into paragraphs for readability but not required. We'll keep as onemaybe too long but okay. Now Responsibilities: Under "Roles & Responsibilities:" then bullet list: "Key opportunities include: - Working on cross-disciplinary teams of similarly bright and motivated engineers on projects of national importance - Real-time communication and sensor systems leveraging state of the art processors, FPGA & SoC technology and cutting-edge SDR platforms - Advanced architectures for high throughput signal processing - Low size, weight, power and cost (SWaP-C), highly integrated custom platforms - A supportive culture of learning, professional growth, and development - Opportunities to build on skills and work on a diverse range of projects - Outstanding continuing education programs" We need to preserve each bullet as
- . Now Requirements (Basic Qualifications): "Typically requires less than 1 year of related experience with a related Bachelor’s degree, or equivalent combination of related education and work experience. A Bachelor’s degree in Computer Engineering, Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, or an equivalent combination of related education and work experience. Strong oral and written communication skills. Proficiency in C and/or C++ programming languages. Familiarity with good software development practices, including: approaches to design, implementation, testing, documentation, and debugging. Understanding of embedded systems and hardware/software interaction. Basic knowledge of low-level processor architectures, operating system concepts, and hardware interfacing. Applicants selected for this position will be subject to a US government security investigation and must be able to obtain and maintain a Department of Defense SECRET clearance, which requires US citizenship In addition, candidates must meet requirements to support project work onsite in our labs and classified facilities on the Bedford Campus This position requires a minimum of 4 days a week on-site at our Bedford, MA facility." Note: The last line about 4 days a week on-site is also schedule info; but we might duplicate. We'll keep it in Requirements as it's a requirement, but also we have Schedule section. To avoid duplication, we could keep schedule info only in Schedule section and not repeat in Requirements. However the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we can include it in both sections? That would be duplication. Better to place it in Schedule section and mention in Requirements maybe as "onsite requirement" but we could note that it's covered elsewhere. However to preserve all info, we need to ensure it's present somewhere. We'll put it in Schedule section and also maybe mention in Requirements as "Onsite work requirement (see Schedule)". But that might be summarizing. Safer to include it in both sections? The instruction says do not invent or summarize away detail. Duplication is not prohibited explicitly, but they said remove duplicated lines. That refers to duplicated lines in the source. Duplicating content ourselves might be okay but could be considered unnecessary. I'd rather include it in Schedule section and not repeat in Requirements; but then the requirement about 4 days on-site would be missing from Requirements section. However the requirement is also a schedule detail; we could treat it as schedule, not a requirement. The Basic Qualifications list includes that line; but we could treat it as part of Requirements but also note schedule. I'd include it in Requirements as a requirement, and also include Schedule section with same info? That would be duplication but maybe acceptable. However they said "remove duplicated lines" meaning from the source, not our own duplication. I think it's okay to have it in both sections if we want to preserve all info. But to be safe, I'll include it in Requirements and also in Schedule (maybe rephrase). But we need to avoid "filler/placeholder text". It's not filler. Let's decide: Keep the 4 days on-site in Requirements (as it's a requirement). Then Schedule section can mention "Onsite work location type: Onsite" and maybe "Minimum 4 days per week on-site at Bedford, MA facility". That's still specific but duplicates. Might be okay. Alternatively, we could move the 4 days line to Schedule and remove from Requirements. But then we lose that requirement from Requirements section. However the requirement is about onsite presence; it's still a requirement. But we could still mention "Onsite work requirement" in Requirements without repeating the exact line. That would be summarizing? Not exactly; we could say "Must be able to work onsite at Bedford, MA facility (minimum 4 days per week)". That's still specific but rephrased. Might be considered summarizing but not inventing. Safer to keep original line in Requirements and also include Schedule with same info? Might be considered duplication but not from source. I'll risk it. Now Qualifications (Preferred): List: "M.S. in Computer Engineering, Computer Science, Electrical Engineering or similar field Active Secret Clearance Familiarity with object-oriented programming principles and working knowledge of one or more higher-level languages such as Python, MATLAB, or Perl. Exposure to modern reconfigurable SoC platforms (AMD Xilinx MPSoC, RFSoC, Versal, or Intel Agilex SoC) Familiarity with common software development tools (e.g., Git, Make, CMake). Understanding of development best practices including code reviews, regression testing, and user documentation.