Principal DSP Engineer

We need to output HTML fragment with sections for About the role? Actually the posting includes "About Heaviside Industries" which is about company, not role. The instruction: use

for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). Do NOT repeat the job title as a heading (the page already shows it) and do NOT put Job ID / requisition numbers as headings — fold minor metadata into a short

or drop it. Preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. IMPORTANT: include a section ONLY when the posting has real, specific content for it — never emit a heading followed by filler/placeholder text (e.g. "commensurate with experience", "not specified", "N/A", "varies", "TBD") and never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless the posting actually states them. Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. We need to decide which sections to include based on content. We have: - About Heaviside Industries (company description). Could be "About the role"? Actually "About the role" is typical heading for role description. But we have "What You Will Do" which is responsibilities. Also "What We Are Looking For" which is qualifications/requirements. Also "Additional Information" includes compensation bands, benefits, clearance, ITAR, EEO. We need to strip EEO boilerplate, but we can keep compensation and benefits info if substantive. We need to avoid filler like "Compensation bands are determined by role, level, location, and alignment with market data. Individual level and base pay is determined on a case-by-case basis and may vary based on job-related skills, education, experience, technical capabilities and internal equity." That's vague but still some info. It says compensation bands determined by role etc. Not specific numbers. According to rule: never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless posting actually states them. It does mention compensation bands, but not specific numbers. Is that enough to include a Pay section? The rule says "never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless the posting actually states them." It does state compensation bands exist, but not actual numbers. Might be considered stating them (they exist). However they also say "Individual level and base pay is determined on a case-by-case basis". That's vague. The instruction: Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. Might be better to include a "Compensation and Benefits" section if there is substantive info about benefits (stock options, medical, vision & dental, 401k). That is substantive. So we can include a Benefits section. We also have clearance requirement and ITAR, which is not a standard heading but could be part of "Additional Information". Could be included in a "Requirements" or "Qualifications" section. Probably we can incorporate into "Qualifications" or "Requirements". The instruction says we can use headings like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. We need to decide which to use. We have: - About Heaviside Industries: could be "About the role"? Actually that is about company, not role. But we could treat as "About the role" heading with description of company and mission. Might be acceptable. - Responsibilities: "What You Will Do" list. - Requirements/Qualifications: "What We Are Looking For" list. - Benefits: from Additional Information: stock options, medical, vision & dental, 401k. - Pay: maybe we can include a short paragraph about compensation bands being determined etc. But it's vague. Might be better to omit Pay section because it's not specific. The rule says never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless posting actually states them. It does state compensation bands exist, but not numbers. I'd lean to include a Pay section with that description? However they said "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." The compensation description is thin. Might be better to omit Pay and just include Benefits. - Schedule: not mentioned. Thus we will have sections: About the role (company description), Responsibilities, Qualifications (or Requirements), Benefits. We need to use

for each section heading. Use

• for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. Use

  for prose. We must preserve all substantive information, not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to keep all bullet points from "What You Will Do" and "What We Are Looking For". Also keep the company description paragraph(s). Also keep benefits details. We must remove boilerplate: EEO, equal-opportunity, scam-warning, etc. Also remove duplicated lines. Also remove application instructions (none present). Also remove navigation/cookie/legal. We need to output only HTML fragment, no /, no markdown fences. Let's extract content. Company description: "Heaviside Industries builds multi-domain autonomous precision munitions for U.S. and allied special operations and conventional forces. While modern warfare has rapidly evolved with the proliferation of unmanned systems, hyper-precise munitions in contested environments are the future of the battlefield. Economical precision strike capabilities are critical to U.S. and allied war efforts, enabling successful defeat of enemy military assets and infrastructure. Heaviside builds precision munitions designed to operate in GPS-denied and spectrum-jammed battlefields—where traditional systems degrade or fail—without inflated prices or sacrifice to performance. All engineering and manufacturing is conducted in-house in Heaviside's Los Angeles, CA headquarters and Oslo, Norway office. Heaviside is backed by Felicis, Hedosophia, Interlagos, Friends & Family Capital, Menlo Ventures, Flume Ventures, Cantos, and others." That's all. Responsibilities (What You Will Do) list: - Architect and ship real-time DSP pipelines on multi-channel RF systems (multi-channels, hardware-locked sampling, OCXO reference) - Implement low-latency, single-snapshot bearing-angle estimation from synchronized multi-channel data — sum-and-difference channel processing and Σ/Δ ratio calibration - Build the closed-loop pipeline: time-of-arrival measurement, pulse-train association, and filters (alpha-beta, Kalman, EKF, IMM) fused with airframe pose - Build the channel-calibration stack — phase, amplitude, and alignment across all receivers, applied in a real-time pipeline - Add false-alarm-rate management, sidelobe blanking, and interference-rejection techniques for contested-spectrum operation - Drive deterministic, sub-millisecond end-to-end pipeline latency that survives transition from prototype to production silicon (FPGA / RFSoC) - Specify, integrate, and bring up the RF systems, timing-reference, and edge-compute stack for new programs - Run bench bring up, anechoic-chamber, and captive-carry verification campaigns to closure We need to keep each as

• . Qualifications (What We Are Looking For) list: - MS or PhD in Electrical Engineering, ECE, Applied Physics, or related field — or equivalent shipped-product experience - 5+ years building real-time DSP systems that ran on actual hardware in actual missions on unmanned aerial systems or ground radar systems - Hands-on experience taking phase-coherent multi-channel systems from bench to flying or fielded system - Production-grade work on at least one of: fire-control radar processing, RWR, ESM, SIGINT, or other RF detection systems - Deep working knowledge of sum-and-difference / comparator-based angle estimation, and the calibration discipline that makes them deliver precision - Production implementation of real-time tracking filters — alpha-beta, Kalman, IMM — with airframe-pose fusion and dropout handling - Pulse-Doppler signal processing experience - Comfortable in BOTH GPU-accelerated Python (NumPy / CuPy / CUDA) for prototype and edge-compute work AND C/C++ for hard-real-time targets; understands when each is appropriate - Experience with industrial- or tactical-grade IMUs and high-stability frequency references (OCXO, CSAC, rubidium) - Practitioner with NanoVNA and calibrated lab VNA; can read multi-port S-parameters and debug a phase-mismatched cable - Eligible to obtain and maintain an active U.S. Secret security clearance We need to keep all. Benefits (from Additional Information): "In addition to base salary, for full-time hires, you may also be eligible for long-term incentives in the form of stock options, access to medical, vision & dental coverage, and access to a 401(k) retirement plan." Also mention: "Compensation bands are determined by role, level, location, and alignment with market data. Individual level and base pay is determined on a case-by-case basis and may vary based on job-related skills, education, experience, technical capabilities and internal equity." This is compensation info but vague. Could be included in Benefits section as a paragraph? Might be considered part of Benefits. But we could also create a separate "Compensation" section. However rule says prefer few substantive sections over many thin ones. The compensation paragraph is thin but still substantive? It says compensation bands determined by role etc. Not specific. Might be better to include it in Benefits section as a paragraph before the list. Also there is ITAR and clearance requirement already in qualifications (clearance). The ITAR statement: "To conform to U.S. Government space technology export regulations, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) you must be a U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident of the U.S., protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3), or eligible to obtain the required authorizations from the U.S. Department of State. Learn more about the ITAR here." This is a requirement but we already have clearance eligibility. Could incorporate into qualifications as an extra bullet? But we should not invent details; we can keep it as a separate bullet under Qualifications? However the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to include that ITAR requirement somewhere. It is not a duplicate; it's substantive. We could add a bullet under Qualifications: "Eligible to conform to ITAR requirements: U.S. citizen, lawful permanent resident, protected individual, or eligible to obtain required authorizations from the U.S. Department of State." But we already have clearance bullet. Might be better to add a separate bullet. But we must not create filler sections. Adding a bullet is fine. We also have EEO statement: "Heaviside is an Equal Opportunity Employer; employment with Heaviside is governed on the basis of merit, competence and qualifications and will not be influenced in any manner by race, color, religion, gender, national origin/ethnicity, veteran status, disability status, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, physical disability or any other". This is boilerplate EEO; we should remove it. Also there is a line: "Learn more about the ITAR here." That's a link; we can keep the phrase but maybe drop the link? The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; the link is not substantive? It's a reference. Might be okay to keep "Learn more about the ITAR." but we can drop the link as it's not substantive. However we might keep the sentence without the URL. Safer to keep the sentence but remove the link? The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; the link is not substantive but it's part of the sentence. Could keep "Learn more about the ITAR." as plain text. We also have "Additional Information" heading; we will not use that as a heading; we will incorporate its content into Benefits and maybe Qualifications. Now we need to output HTML. Structure:

  About the role

  Heaviside Industries builds multi-domain autonomous precision munitions for U.S. and allied special operations and conventional forces. While modern warfare has rapidly evolved with the proliferation of unmanned systems, hyper-precise munitions in contested environments are the future of the battlefield. Economical precision strike capabilities