| 查看: 2262 | 回复: 30 | ||
| 【奖励】 本帖被评价12次，作者markero增加金币 9 个 | ||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | ||
[资源]
欧盟第七科研框架计划发布53个项目招标公告
|
||
|
不要只光顾着国内的基金申请，试试国际上欧盟项目吧。 版主给我发金币吧。 see http://www.delchn.ec.europa.eu/?item=news_view&nid=545 2009年7月30日，欧盟第七个研究与技术开发框架计划（第七框架计划）发布了53个项目招标公告，项目招标内容涵盖第七框架计划的诸多领域。项目招标公告涉及的领域包括框架计划的四个专项计划：合作计划、原始创新计划、人力资源计划、以及研究能力建设计划。 合作专项计划共发布了29个招标公告，研究领域包括健康，食品、农渔业和生物技术，信息通讯技术，纳米科学、纳米技术、材料和新制造技术，能源，环境（包括气候变化），交通，社会经济学和人文科学，空间和安全。非欧洲国家（包括中国）可参加所有招标的项目，其中，下列五个项目明确要求中国的参与： 1. 环境 – 温室气体减排政策及其对公众健康的影响 该项目将建立一个方法论框架，评估温室气体减排各项政策可能为城市公众的健康及福祉带来的风险与收益，并确定能够为公众健康和福祉带来最大利益的政策。 2. 健康 – 系统分析蛋白质的翻译后修饰 入选项目要与中方同类项目紧密合作。预期中国科技部科研计划将发布类似招标，资助中方单位在该领域的研究，欧盟资助的项目将与中方项目紧密合作。 3. 食品、农渔业和生物技术 – 中欧植物育种伙伴计划 中国农业科学院有意支持或 / 并开展相关辅助研究。 4. 交通 – 先进飞机噪声预测及控制方法、大型钛航空结构零部件铸造、降阻气流控制及机翼气动弹性优化 中方项目单位将得到工业和信息化部的资助。 5. 社会经济学和人文科学 – 当代中国城市化趋势和进程 该项目将帮助中欧研究人员全面而深入地研究当代中国，并对比参考欧洲有益的经验。 有关项目招标的详细信息欢迎登陆第七框架计划网站： http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/calls/ 联系方式: 欧洲委员会驻中国和蒙古国代表团 科技处 公使衔参赞 帕友国先生 电子信箱：georges.papageorgiou@ec.europa.eu 项目官员 钟文女士 电子信箱：wen.zhong@ec.europa.eu |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
国家基金申请书模板内插入图片不可调整大小?
已经有9人回复
-
退学或坚持读
已经有20人回复
-
免疫学博士有名额，速联系
已经有14人回复
-
面上基金申报没有其他的参与者成吗
已经有4人回复
-
多组分精馏求助
已经有6人回复
-
国家级人才课题组招收2026年入学博士
已经有6人回复
» 本主题相关商家推荐: (我也要在这里推广)
2楼2009-08-13 18:16:13
4楼2009-08-13 21:11:35
5楼2009-08-13 21:40:27
7楼2009-08-13 23:13:58
8楼2009-08-13 23:40:39
9楼2009-08-13 23:53:19
10楼2009-08-13 23:56:54
11楼2009-08-14 00:17:31
12楼2009-08-14 00:54:54
13楼2009-08-14 01:17:34
15楼2009-08-14 06:46:45
16楼2009-08-14 06:48:26
17楼2009-08-14 08:06:34
18楼2009-08-14 09:09:50
19楼2009-08-14 09:27:06
20楼2009-08-14 09:40:46
21楼2009-08-14 11:07:39
22楼2009-08-14 11:45:57
24楼2009-08-14 15:52:35
25楼2009-08-14 15:54:05
|
欧盟项目的评分标准： SCORING Scores must be in the range 0-5. Decimal points may be given. Interpretation of the scores: 0- The proposal fails to address the criterion under examination or cannot be judged due to missing or incomplete information. 1– Poor. The criterion is addressed in an inadequate manner, or there are serious inherent weaknesses. 2– Fair. While the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses. 3– Good. The proposal addresses the criterion well, although improvements would be necessary. 4– Very good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, although certain improvements are still possible. 5– Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion in question. Any shortcomings are minor. |
26楼2009-08-14 15:56:36
|
我把我们申请成功的评分贴出来给大家看看， 看看EU的评审专家是怎么给分的，跟国内的专家评审有啥不一样。 主要看四个部分，5分是满分。4分是Very good. 我们分别拿到 了4.5/5, 4.3/5, 4.0/5和4.5/5, 加权平均后是 87.3/100。 Criterion 1. Quality of the Exchange Programme (Threshold 0.00/5.00) ESR - Evaluation summary report - The proposal has scientific objectives that are well articulated and justified. - All the partners are of excellent scientific quality, including technical and theoretical expertise. - In terms of synergies, there are complementarities of expertise from all partners, and contribution to achieve the planned objectives is credible. Weakness of the Proposal - Synergies between the participants overall in the early steps (i.e., data mining) are not quite clear. Criterion 2. Transfer of Knowledge (Threshold 3.00/5.00) Strengths of the Proposal - The potential of a balanced transfer of exchange between EU partners and Third Country is very good. - The proposed staff exchanges are adequate for the tasks involved. Criterion 3. Implementation (Threshold 0.00/5.00) Strengths of the Proposal - Capacities to achieve the objectives of the cooperation are overall good, and described in an organized way. - Concerning the facilities and infrastructure, all partner laboratories are well equipped and appropriate for the exchange plan. Weaknesses of the Proposal - Overall management plans of the exchange programme are shortly addressed, and information regarding the management scheme of human resources is insufficiently presented in the proposal. - The expertise on computer-aided drug design and virtual screening Weaknesses of the Proposal - While the necessity of staff exchanges between some partners are evident, the long time stays demanded for exchange between others are not clearly justified. - Information and dissemination of knowledge outside of the network is not well detailed. For example, no description of small scale workshops, training sessions and seminars among the participants for closer interactions is evident. Criterion 4. Impact (Threshold 3.00/5.00) Strengths of the Proposal - The proposal extends an existing collaboration and will produce a significant amount of scientific and methodological knowledge for ERA. - It is a strong point of this proposal that personnel who could be a key liaison exists for this project. This will facilitate in developing a lasting partnership among the participants. - As a result of the proposed and the previously ongoing collaboration, a lasting and productive relationship for the involved institutions in Europe and China can be foreseen. Weakness of the Proposal - The project will |
27楼2009-08-14 16:03:14
28楼2009-08-14 16:15:27
29楼2009-08-14 22:06:26
31楼2009-08-15 17:51:39
简单回复
climbery3楼
2009-08-13 19:47
回复
cosine6楼
2009-08-13 21:51
回复
luxin95122314楼
2009-08-14 05:49
回复
jqsj23楼
2009-08-14 13:04
回复
2009-08-15 10:23
回复
好