2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)

[academic_guru]

Why would it go to "ranking" quickly? What is different from last year? If anything it should go slower because there are more proposals.
I dont really think they care about the candidates being stressed to find out. They will just do their job.

Well, it depends when they rank the proposals. If the status changes to ranking quickly, then results will be out next week.

Stop being Pessimistic and have some patience.

[Thana2019]

Thanks! It says evaluation! Exciting! Not sure when the status turned to evaluation though since this is the first time that link worked for me

https://ec.europa.eu/research/participa ... ect/XXXXXX

Copy the link and paste it in another page.

Change XXXXXX for your proposal number.

You have to be logged in to see it.

Cheers

Hi everyone,

First post here, but have been reading along for a while. Just wondering: where are you seeing the status change? When I log in to the funding portal all it says under status for me is ‘final’ (so not submitted or evaluation). It has said this from the start...

Cheers and fingers crossed for everyone

[lolome]

It seems we all have changed the status to evaluation today. According to other years, it has to change from
evaluation to ranking sometime.

Anyway, we are not going to see the results in the link, we will know it when they send us the email.

Thanks! It says evaluation! Exciting! Not sure when the status turned to evaluation though since this is the first time that link worked for me

https://ec.europa.eu/research/participa ... ect/XXXXXX

Copy the link and paste it in another page.

Change XXXXXX for your proposal number.

You have to be logged in to see it.

Cheers

Hi everyone,

First post here, but have been reading along for a while. Just wondering: where are you seeing the status change? When I log in to the funding portal all it says under status for me is ‘final’ (so not submitted or evaluation). It has said this from the start...

Cheers and fingers crossed for everyone

[evolved]

something very annoying and non transparent is that they dont share the 3 reviewer scores in the evaluation reports. Why? where is the breakdown of the score? to see how they reached the final decision.

[Flocci]

This is a very good observation. I had the same thoughts on this

something very annoying and non transparent is that they dont share the 3 reviewer scores in the evaluation reports. Why? where is the breakdown of the score? to see how they reached the final decision.

[evolved]

the other annoying thing is that they actually change their initial grades to reach a "consensus". No, they should just have the original average. Who knows what biases can enter when they reevaluate their decision based on other's comments. Their evaluations become non-independent.

This is a very good observation. I had the same thoughts on this

something very annoying and non transparent is that they dont share the 3 reviewer scores in the evaluation reports. Why? where is the breakdown of the score? to see how they reached the final decision.

[academic_guru]

the other annoying thing is that they actually change their initial grades to reach a "consensus". No, they should just have the original average. Who knows what biases can enter when they reevaluate their decision based on other's comments. Their evaluations become non-independent.

This is a very good observation. I had the same thoughts on this

something very annoying and non transparent is that they dont share the 3 reviewer scores in the evaluation reports. Why? where is the breakdown of the score? to see how they reached the final decision.

This is true. Last year I was in the reserve list, my score 91.2 and threshold was 91.4 for ST-Chem, I had good score in section 1 and 2 but in section implementation they cut a lot of score (4.1/5) and I agree I had some flaws but 4.1/5 was way too low but had they given me 4.2 or 4.3 would have easily crossed the threshold. I feel like I was stopped intentionally. Also, my host was not that renowned last year but this year i have applied with one of the top Prof. in my field. So will see how much impact strong host have.

[megasphaera]

Very good point. But then, how can you prevent that only evaluator that wants to f**k you for any stupid reason?

the other annoying thing is that they actually change their initial grades to reach a "consensus". No, they should just have the original average. Who knows what biases can enter when they reevaluate their decision based on other's comments. Their evaluations become non-independent.

This is a very good observation. I had the same thoughts on this

This is true. Last year I was in the reserve list, my score 91.2 and threshold was 91.4 for ST-Chem, I had good score in section 1 and 2 but in section implementation they cut a lot of score (4.1/5) and I agree I had some flaws but 4.1/5 was way too low but had they given me 4.2 or 4.3 would have easily crossed the threshold. I feel like I was stopped intentionally. Also, my host was not that renowned last year but this year i have applied with one of the top Prof. in my field. So will see how much impact strong host have.

[evolved]

its no problem if one reviewer is crazy, it will be obvious in the breakdown of the scores. There should be an additional rule that if the scores diverge above a certain threshold, an additional evaluator gives the definitive score.

In any case and any system, they should communicate the individual comments and scores separately to the candidate. Much more useful, as if there is disagreement for a point among reviewers then you know you lost points due to luck and not due to a definitive weekness of the proposal. So you know which parts to improve.

Very good point. But then, how can you prevent that only evaluator that wants to f**k you for any stupid reason?

the other annoying thing is that they actually change their initial grades to reach a "consensus". No, they should just have the original average. Who knows what biases can enter when they reevaluate their decision based on other's comments. Their evaluations become non-independent.

This is true. Last year I was in the reserve list, my score 91.2 and threshold was 91.4 for ST-Chem, I had good score in section 1 and 2 but in section implementation they cut a lot of score (4.1/5) and I agree I had some flaws but 4.1/5 was way too low but had they given me 4.2 or 4.3 would have easily crossed the threshold. I feel like I was stopped intentionally. Also, my host was not that renowned last year but this year i have applied with one of the top Prof. in my field. So will see how much impact strong host have.

[pkem]

As I understand, when our proposal submission is complete, the phase becomes 'submission'. Likewise, when evaluation is complete (i. e., ESR is uploaded in our account), the phase will change to 'evaluation'. So, only when we get our final ranking by email, the phase will change to ranking. Till then, fingers crossed.