m***c
发帖数: 1403 | 1 multiple rating, 比如VG/G 是不是就相当于2.5? E=4,VG=3,G=2,F=1 | d******u
发帖数: 1114 | | f*******e
发帖数: 3433 | 3 就是介于good和very good之间
【在 m***c 的大作中提到】
: multiple rating, 比如VG/G 是不是就相当于2.5? E=4,VG=3,G=2,F=1
| m***c
发帖数: 1403 | 4 这个我知道，但是如果多个打分都是multiple的话，是不是最后还是得转换成
数字平均一下才能排序
【在 f*******e 的大作中提到】
: 就是介于good和very good之间
| f*******e
发帖数: 3433 | 5 不是. 从来不转换成数字. panel讨论决定排名. 有可能分数高的排名更后.
【在 m***c 的大作中提到】
: 这个我知道，但是如果多个打分都是multiple的话，是不是最后还是得转换成
: 数字平均一下才能排序
| p*****g
发帖数: 996 | 6 还有poor呢吧
【在 m***c 的大作中提到】
: multiple rating, 比如VG/G 是不是就相当于2.5? E=4,VG=3,G=2,F=1
| A***a
发帖数: 73 | 7 For the NSF review panels I attended, the rating of "Good" means "not a good
proposal". It is basically means "not competitive". If none of the three
reviewers gives you a rating higher than "Good", you will end up with a "
triage".
If you receive one "very good" rating, this reviewer may help you defend
your proposal because he/she thinks you have some good elements in your
proposal that they want to elaborate to other reviewers. However, with my
limited experience, I have not yet seen a case that a reviewer can turn
around the situation single handed. So with only one VG, you at the most
will end up with a ranking of "low competitive".
If you have two "VG", you got lucky. Two reviewers in favor of your
proposal normally can convince the other one and the rest of the panel that
your proposal is worthy of consideration. So you will end up at least at
the ranking of "low competitive" and very likely will receive a ranking of "
competitive".
If you receive one "E" and 2 "G", that means one reviewer really likes your
proposal and he/she will defend your proposal to his/her best. If this
reviewer is eloquent, highly respected, and knowledgeable, you got a chance.
If you receive ratings above 1 "E" and 2 "VG", I guess your proposal will
very much likely be funded.
Highly competitive --> fund
Competitive ---> consider fund
---------------not funded
Low competitive--> go back and revise based on the reviewers' comments
not competitive--> move on dude. | h*****w
发帖数: 8561 | 8 2E 1G还是low competitive的路过
NSF太象抓彩票，没有一个数字分导致PO的可操作性太强
good
three
【在 A***a 的大作中提到】
: For the NSF review panels I attended, the rating of "Good" means "not a good
: proposal". It is basically means "not competitive". If none of the three
: reviewers gives you a rating higher than "Good", you will end up with a "
: triage".
: If you receive one "very good" rating, this reviewer may help you defend
: your proposal because he/she thinks you have some good elements in your
: proposal that they want to elaborate to other reviewers. However, with my
: limited experience, I have not yet seen a case that a reviewer can turn
: around the situation single handed. So with only one VG, you at the most
: will end up with a ranking of "low competitive".
| f*******e
发帖数: 3433 | 9 不同program不一样. 有的program 1个panel只有2,3个proposal有E的, 有的program给
很多E. 你的program的2E1G估计相当于他说的program的2V1F. 一旦有一个低分,就很难
拿competitive.
【在 h*****w 的大作中提到】
: 2E 1G还是low competitive的路过
: NSF太象抓彩票，没有一个数字分导致PO的可操作性太强
:
: good
: three
| m***c
发帖数: 1403 | 10 thanks for the very detailed comments. 但是你主要说的是single rating的情况
我们这个program为什么reviewers都喜欢打multiple rating,每个人给的都是
vg/g e/vg 这样的rating, 不是说两个人一个人打g一个人打vg.
good
three
【在 A***a 的大作中提到】
: For the NSF review panels I attended, the rating of "Good" means "not a good
: proposal". It is basically means "not competitive". If none of the three
: reviewers gives you a rating higher than "Good", you will end up with a "
: triage".
: If you receive one "very good" rating, this reviewer may help you defend
: your proposal because he/she thinks you have some good elements in your
: proposal that they want to elaborate to other reviewers. However, with my
: limited experience, I have not yet seen a case that a reviewer can turn
: around the situation single handed. So with only one VG, you at the most
: will end up with a ranking of "low competitive".
| n******g
发帖数: 662 | 11 各个program都不一样，在有的program拿VG 和 G 都是不容易的事情。
【在 m***c 的大作中提到】
: multiple rating, 比如VG/G 是不是就相当于2.5? E=4,VG=3,G=2,F=1
| f*******e
发帖数: 3433 | 12 觉得比G好,但比V差,就给G/V. 我给过不少proposal multiple rating. 有一个G/V就不
会triage了.
【在 m***c 的大作中提到】
: thanks for the very detailed comments. 但是你主要说的是single rating的情况
: 我们这个program为什么reviewers都喜欢打multiple rating,每个人给的都是
: vg/g e/vg 这样的rating, 不是说两个人一个人打g一个人打vg.
:
: good
: three
| I****p
发帖数: 101 | 13 e/vg in many cases means rating for "scientific merit"/"broad impact" in my
field.
【在 m***c 的大作中提到】
: thanks for the very detailed comments. 但是你主要说的是single rating的情况
: 我们这个program为什么reviewers都喜欢打multiple rating,每个人给的都是
: vg/g e/vg 这样的rating, 不是说两个人一个人打g一个人打vg.
:
: good
: three
|
|
