Quantum PDK Design Enablement Engineer
for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). So we should create sections like About the role (maybe from Summary Of Role). Responsibilities (Essential Responsibilities, Other Responsibilities). Requirements (maybe Required Qualifications). Qualifications (Preferred Qualifications). Skills (maybe Knowledge, Skills & Abilities). Benefits (none given). Pay (Expected Salary Range). Schedule (maybe Travel up to 10%? Not schedule; schedule maybe not present). The posting does not mention schedule (like full-time, part-time). So we should not create Schedule section unless there is real content. No schedule info. So omit Schedule.
Benefits: none mentioned. So omit Benefits.
Pay: we have Expected Salary Range $98,000.00 - $176,000.00 plus note. So include Pay section.
Now we need to preserve all substantive information, not invent or summarize away detail. Use - for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and
for prose.
We need to avoid repeating job title as heading. Not include Job ID etc.
We need to remove boilerplate: cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning, duplicated lines, application instructions. The posting includes a lot of EEO statement at end. Must remove that.
Also remove "If you need a reasonable accommodation..." etc? That's maybe part of application instructions? It's about accommodation request. Might be considered boilerplate? The instruction: remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. The accommodation request could be considered application instructions? It's about requesting accommodation. Might be considered part of application process. Safer to remove it. Also remove "An offer with GlobalFoundries is conditioned upon..." etc. That's legal. Remove.
Also remove "GlobalFoundries is fully committed to equal opportunity..." etc. Remove.
Now we need to keep substantive content: company description (About GlobalFoundries) maybe not needed as a heading but could be part of About the role? The instruction says use headings for sections like About the role, Responsibilities, etc. The company description could go under About the role? Or we could make a separate section "About GlobalFoundries"? Not in allowed headings list. Probably we should incorporate it into About the role section (since it's about the role and company). The Summary Of Role already describes role. We could combine company description into About the role paragraph.
Thus About the role section: include company description and summary of role.
Responsibilities: Essential Responsibilities and Other Responsibilities combined.
Requirements: Required Qualifications (Education, Experience, etc). Might also include Travel up to 10%? That's not a requirement but maybe a condition. Could be placed under Requirements as a note.
Qualifications: Preferred Qualifications.
Skills: Knowledge, Skills & Abilities section.
Pay: Expected Salary Range.
We must not create sections with filler like "commensurate with experience". Not present.
Now we need to format using
for each section heading. Inside each section, use
for prose,
- for lists.
We need to preserve all substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to keep details like bullet points etc. The original text has paragraphs, not bullet lists. We can convert sentences into
or we can keep as
. For lists, we need to detect any list of duties/requirements/benefits. The original has sentences separated by periods, not bullet lists. We could still wrap each sentence in
. But instruction: use
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. If there is no explicit list (like bullet points), we can just use
. So we will not create
unless we see bullet-like items. There are none.
Thus each section will have elements.
We need to ensure we don't lose any detail.
Let's extract content.
Company description:
"About GlobalFoundries GlobalFoundries is a leading full-service semiconductor foundry providing a unique combination of design, development, and fabrication services to some of the world’s most inspired technology companies. With a global manufacturing footprint spanning three continents, GlobalFoundries makes possible the technologies and systems that transform industries and give customers the power to shape their markets. For more information, visit www.gf.com."
Summary Of Role:
"The Design Enablement Engineer, DRC/LVS/PEX is responsible for developing, qualifying, and deploying physical verification and parasitic extraction components for semiconductor Process Design Kits (PDKs). The role translates complex process and design requirements into accurate, robust, and efficient DRC, LVS, and PEX rule decks and verification flows, while advancing automation and AI/ML-assisted methodologies to improve PDK quality, development efficiency, and customer design success. The Design Enablement Engineer develops and deploys critical PDK components that accurately represent semiconductor manufacturing processes within customer design and verification environments. The engineer will work at the intersection of process technology, design rules, device modeling, EDA, circuit design, and physical design to create differentiated physical verification and extraction solutions that enable first-time-right product designs. The role will have particular responsibility for Design Rule Checking (DRC), Layout Versus Schematic (LVS), and Parasitic Extraction (PEX) rule development, validation, release, and continuous improvement. The engineer will also develop advanced automation and explore AI/ML-based approaches for rule generation, test-case creation, coverage analysis, debugging, anomaly detection, and verification-flow optimization."
We can combine these into About the role section.
Now Responsibilities:
Essential Responsibilities list (each sentence):
- Develop, code, qualify, and maintain DRC, LVS, and PEX rule decks and associated PDK components that accurately represent semiconductor process, device, interconnect, and design requirements.
- Translate process integration requirements, design rules, device definitions, and electrical models into production-quality physical verification and extraction solutions for customer and internal design flows.
- Develop comprehensive regression and test methodologies to validate rule-deck correctness, coverage, performance, scalability, and compatibility across supported technology and EDA environments.
- Analyze and debug complex DRC, LVS, and PEX issues, identify root causes, and work with process, modeling, design, and EDA teams to resolve discrepancies between process intent and design-flow implementation.
- Partner with process technology, design rule, compact modeling, reliability, circuit design, layout, and EDA teams to ensure accurate representation of semiconductor technologies throughout the design-to-manufacturing flow.
- Develop differentiated automation and AI/ML-assisted methodologies for rule-deck development, automated test generation, coverage assessment, error classification, anomaly detection, debugging, and continuous verification of PDK quality.
- Optimize physical verification and extraction flows for accuracy, runtime, memory usage, scalability, usability, and deployment into production design environments.
- Drive PDK quality and release readiness through structured qualification, regression testing, documentation, change management, and continuous improvement based on internal and customer design feedback.
Other Responsibilities:
- Perform all activities in a safe and responsible manner and support all Environmental, Health, Safety & Security requirements and programs.
- Work and collaborate on other projects and/or assignments as needed.
We can combine.
Now Requirements (Required Qualifications):
Education: Bachelor's degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, Microelectronics, Computer Science, Applied Physics, or a related technical field.
Experience: Relevant experience in semiconductor PDK development, physical verification, EDA, IC physical design, parasitic extraction, or a related field, with minimum years aligned to the applicable GF career level.
Physical Verification: Experience with DRC and/or LVS rule development, coding, debug, or qualification.
PEX: Understanding of parasitic resistance and capacitance extraction, interconnect modeling, layout-dependent effects, and their impact on circuit performance.
Semiconductor Technology: Working knowledge of CMOS process technologies, semiconductor devices, layout design rules, interconnect structures, and design-to-manufacturing interactions.
EDA: Experience with industry-standard physical verification and/or extraction environments and rule-deck development methodologies.
Programming/Automation: Experience with scripting or programming languages such as Python, Tcl, Perl, shell scripting, or equivalent for engineering automation, regression testing, and data analysis.
Analytical Skills: Demonstrated ability to troubleshoot complex technical problems, perform structured root-cause analysis, and translate findings into robust engineering solutions.
Travel: Up to 10%.
Fluency in English Language: Written and verbal.
We need to keep all that.
Now Qualifications (Preferred Qualifications):
Master's degree or PhD in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, Microelectronics, Applied Physics, Computer Science, or a related field.
Experience developing and releasing production PDK DRC, LVS, and/or PEX rule decks for semiconductor technologies.
Experience with physical verification environments such as Siemens Calibre, Synopsys IC Validator, Cadence Pegasus/PVS, or equivalent tools.
Experience with PEX technology-file development, RC extraction, process-corner modeling, and silicon/model correlation.
Experience developing automated regression environments, rule coverage metrics, test structures, or PDK qualification methodologies.
Experience applying AI/ML, generative AI, or data-driven techniques to semiconductor design enablement, such as automated rule coding, test-pattern generation, verification debug, error classification, or PDK quality analysis.
Understanding of interactions among process integration, design rules, OPC/lithography, device modeling, reliability, extraction, and circuit design.
Experience collaborating directly with EDA vendors and internal or external design teams to develop and deploy differentiated design enablement capabilities.
Strong written and verbal communication skills.
Strong planning and organizational skills.
Now Skills (Knowledge, Skills & Abilities):
"Increased knowledge plus broader technical knowledge that facilitates more integrative thinking. Requires a technical (University) degree. (Exceptions approved by local HR). BS + 6-7 years of experience or MS + 5-6 years or PhD + 3-4 years"
We need to keep that.
Now Pay:
"Expected Salary Range $98,000.00 - $176,000.00 The exact Salary will be determined based on qualifications, experience and location."
We keep that.
Now we need to output HTML fragment only, no /, no markdown.
We'll produce something like:
About the role
...
Responsibilities
...
maybe multiple for each bullet? Could combine into one
with sentences separated. But instruction: use
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. Since we have multiple duties, we could treat them as a list and use
- . That would be appropriate. The instruction says use
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. So we should convert the responsibilities into a list. Similarly for Requirements (Required Qualifications) and Preferred Qualifications and Skills maybe also lists. So we should use
- for those.
Thus:
Responsibilities:
- each duty.
Requirements:
- each required qualification.
Qualifications:
- each preferred qualification.
Skills:
- each skill item (maybe just one paragraph but we can still list).
Pay: maybe just
.
Schedule: omit.
Benefits: omit.
Now we need to ensure we don't lose any detail. Let's extract each item precisely.
Responsibilities items:
1. Develop, code, qualify, and maintain DRC, LVS, and PEX rule decks and associated PDK components that accurately represent semiconductor process, device, interconnect, and design requirements.
2. Translate process integration requirements, design rules, device definitions
for prose. We need to avoid repeating job title as heading. Not include Job ID etc. We need to remove boilerplate: cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning, duplicated lines, application instructions. The posting includes a lot of EEO statement at end. Must remove that. Also remove "If you need a reasonable accommodation..." etc? That's maybe part of application instructions? It's about accommodation request. Might be considered boilerplate? The instruction: remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. The accommodation request could be considered application instructions? It's about requesting accommodation. Might be considered part of application process. Safer to remove it. Also remove "An offer with GlobalFoundries is conditioned upon..." etc. That's legal. Remove. Also remove "GlobalFoundries is fully committed to equal opportunity..." etc. Remove. Now we need to keep substantive content: company description (About GlobalFoundries) maybe not needed as a heading but could be part of About the role? The instruction says use headings for sections like About the role, Responsibilities, etc. The company description could go under About the role? Or we could make a separate section "About GlobalFoundries"? Not in allowed headings list. Probably we should incorporate it into About the role section (since it's about the role and company). The Summary Of Role already describes role. We could combine company description into About the role paragraph. Thus About the role section: include company description and summary of role. Responsibilities: Essential Responsibilities and Other Responsibilities combined. Requirements: Required Qualifications (Education, Experience, etc). Might also include Travel up to 10%? That's not a requirement but maybe a condition. Could be placed under Requirements as a note. Qualifications: Preferred Qualifications. Skills: Knowledge, Skills & Abilities section. Pay: Expected Salary Range. We must not create sections with filler like "commensurate with experience". Not present. Now we need to format using
for each section heading. Inside each section, use
for prose,
- for lists.
We need to preserve all substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to keep details like bullet points etc. The original text has paragraphs, not bullet lists. We can convert sentences into
or we can keep as
. For lists, we need to detect any list of duties/requirements/benefits. The original has sentences separated by periods, not bullet lists. We could still wrap each sentence in
. But instruction: use
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. If there is no explicit list (like bullet points), we can just use
. So we will not create
- unless we see bullet-like items. There are none.
Thus each section will have
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. Since we have multiple duties, we could treat them as a list and use
- . That would be appropriate. The instruction says use
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. So we should convert the responsibilities into a list. Similarly for Requirements (Required Qualifications) and Preferred Qualifications and Skills maybe also lists. So we should use
- for those.
Thus:
Responsibilities:
- each duty.
Requirements:
- each required qualification.
Qualifications:
- each preferred qualification.
Skills:
- each skill item (maybe just one paragraph but we can still list).
Pay: maybe just
. Schedule: omit. Benefits: omit. Now we need to ensure we don't lose any detail. Let's extract each item precisely. Responsibilities items: 1. Develop, code, qualify, and maintain DRC, LVS, and PEX rule decks and associated PDK components that accurately represent semiconductor process, device, interconnect, and design requirements. 2. Translate process integration requirements, design rules, device definitions
- each skill item (maybe just one paragraph but we can still list).
Pay: maybe just
- each preferred qualification.
Skills:
- each required qualification.
Qualifications:
- each duty.
Requirements:
- for those.
Thus:
Responsibilities:
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. So we should convert the responsibilities into a list. Similarly for Requirements (Required Qualifications) and Preferred Qualifications and Skills maybe also lists. So we should use
- . That would be appropriate. The instruction says use
elements. We need to ensure we don't lose any detail. Let's extract content. Company description: "About GlobalFoundries GlobalFoundries is a leading full-service semiconductor foundry providing a unique combination of design, development, and fabrication services to some of the world’s most inspired technology companies. With a global manufacturing footprint spanning three continents, GlobalFoundries makes possible the technologies and systems that transform industries and give customers the power to shape their markets. For more information, visit www.gf.com." Summary Of Role: "The Design Enablement Engineer, DRC/LVS/PEX is responsible for developing, qualifying, and deploying physical verification and parasitic extraction components for semiconductor Process Design Kits (PDKs). The role translates complex process and design requirements into accurate, robust, and efficient DRC, LVS, and PEX rule decks and verification flows, while advancing automation and AI/ML-assisted methodologies to improve PDK quality, development efficiency, and customer design success. The Design Enablement Engineer develops and deploys critical PDK components that accurately represent semiconductor manufacturing processes within customer design and verification environments. The engineer will work at the intersection of process technology, design rules, device modeling, EDA, circuit design, and physical design to create differentiated physical verification and extraction solutions that enable first-time-right product designs. The role will have particular responsibility for Design Rule Checking (DRC), Layout Versus Schematic (LVS), and Parasitic Extraction (PEX) rule development, validation, release, and continuous improvement. The engineer will also develop advanced automation and explore AI/ML-based approaches for rule generation, test-case creation, coverage analysis, debugging, anomaly detection, and verification-flow optimization." We can combine these into About the role section. Now Responsibilities: Essential Responsibilities list (each sentence): - Develop, code, qualify, and maintain DRC, LVS, and PEX rule decks and associated PDK components that accurately represent semiconductor process, device, interconnect, and design requirements. - Translate process integration requirements, design rules, device definitions, and electrical models into production-quality physical verification and extraction solutions for customer and internal design flows. - Develop comprehensive regression and test methodologies to validate rule-deck correctness, coverage, performance, scalability, and compatibility across supported technology and EDA environments. - Analyze and debug complex DRC, LVS, and PEX issues, identify root causes, and work with process, modeling, design, and EDA teams to resolve discrepancies between process intent and design-flow implementation. - Partner with process technology, design rule, compact modeling, reliability, circuit design, layout, and EDA teams to ensure accurate representation of semiconductor technologies throughout the design-to-manufacturing flow. - Develop differentiated automation and AI/ML-assisted methodologies for rule-deck development, automated test generation, coverage assessment, error classification, anomaly detection, debugging, and continuous verification of PDK quality. - Optimize physical verification and extraction flows for accuracy, runtime, memory usage, scalability, usability, and deployment into production design environments. - Drive PDK quality and release readiness through structured qualification, regression testing, documentation, change management, and continuous improvement based on internal and customer design feedback. Other Responsibilities: - Perform all activities in a safe and responsible manner and support all Environmental, Health, Safety & Security requirements and programs. - Work and collaborate on other projects and/or assignments as needed. We can combine. Now Requirements (Required Qualifications): Education: Bachelor's degree in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, Microelectronics, Computer Science, Applied Physics, or a related technical field. Experience: Relevant experience in semiconductor PDK development, physical verification, EDA, IC physical design, parasitic extraction, or a related field, with minimum years aligned to the applicable GF career level. Physical Verification: Experience with DRC and/or LVS rule development, coding, debug, or qualification. PEX: Understanding of parasitic resistance and capacitance extraction, interconnect modeling, layout-dependent effects, and their impact on circuit performance. Semiconductor Technology: Working knowledge of CMOS process technologies, semiconductor devices, layout design rules, interconnect structures, and design-to-manufacturing interactions. EDA: Experience with industry-standard physical verification and/or extraction environments and rule-deck development methodologies. Programming/Automation: Experience with scripting or programming languages such as Python, Tcl, Perl, shell scripting, or equivalent for engineering automation, regression testing, and data analysis. Analytical Skills: Demonstrated ability to troubleshoot complex technical problems, perform structured root-cause analysis, and translate findings into robust engineering solutions. Travel: Up to 10%. Fluency in English Language: Written and verbal. We need to keep all that. Now Qualifications (Preferred Qualifications): Master's degree or PhD in Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, Microelectronics, Applied Physics, Computer Science, or a related field. Experience developing and releasing production PDK DRC, LVS, and/or PEX rule decks for semiconductor technologies. Experience with physical verification environments such as Siemens Calibre, Synopsys IC Validator, Cadence Pegasus/PVS, or equivalent tools. Experience with PEX technology-file development, RC extraction, process-corner modeling, and silicon/model correlation. Experience developing automated regression environments, rule coverage metrics, test structures, or PDK qualification methodologies. Experience applying AI/ML, generative AI, or data-driven techniques to semiconductor design enablement, such as automated rule coding, test-pattern generation, verification debug, error classification, or PDK quality analysis. Understanding of interactions among process integration, design rules, OPC/lithography, device modeling, reliability, extraction, and circuit design. Experience collaborating directly with EDA vendors and internal or external design teams to develop and deploy differentiated design enablement capabilities. Strong written and verbal communication skills. Strong planning and organizational skills. Now Skills (Knowledge, Skills & Abilities): "Increased knowledge plus broader technical knowledge that facilitates more integrative thinking. Requires a technical (University) degree. (Exceptions approved by local HR). BS + 6-7 years of experience or MS + 5-6 years or PhD + 3-4 years" We need to keep that. Now Pay: "Expected Salary Range $98,000.00 - $176,000.00 The exact Salary will be determined based on qualifications, experience and location." We keep that. Now we need to output HTML fragment only, no /, no markdown. We'll produce something like:
About the role
...
Responsibilities
...
maybe multiplefor each bullet? Could combine into one
with sentences separated. But instruction: use
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. Since we have multiple duties, we could treat them as a list and use
- for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. If there is no explicit list (like bullet points), we can just use