Total compensation: Definitely a wide range, but a few hundred K would be the median. Recruiting: one of my labmates flat out refused to do algorithmic interviews for a research position and the company still gave him an offer. Your projects, papers, and ability to demonstrate your understanding of research topics are far more important then your ability to solve a small, defined problem in 45 minutes.

I assume there is a distinction between software engineering and research applicants in terms of their interviews at the Big 4s? I know two people with PhDs that were given algorithmic questions and had to go through the same process as regular software developers (this was at the same Big 4 company). The only exception is one had expertise in ML and during one of his interviews they brought in a ML expert and interviewed them on their dissertation, in addition to their 4-5 algorithmic interviews. Both of these people were interviewing for software developer positions despite having expertise in research. Wasn't sure if the research interviews would be different. Good on your lab mate.

I interviewed for a research position at Facebook reality labs, and it was the same process as an interview for an academic job. Give an hour talk about your research, meet with 6 researchers in hour chunks for the rest of the day. The process was similar for my previous industry research job as well. I can't speak to Facebook's other research arms or Google.

Good to know. So you you weren't asked any algorithmic leetcode-style questions or questions testing that you have basic knowledge of your field (e.g. tell me what a random forest is)? Doesn't sound like it. It was more focused on your research?

There weren't any whiteboard algorithm questions, no.

> questions testing that you have basic knowledge of your field

Not directly, but in discussing my research the interviewers drilled down into the contents of my papers, etc.

Okay, thanks.