Distributions of the scores after consensus meetings for the 3 different panels for the calls in 2015 and 2019.

<p>For each panel, the first plot represents the distribution of the consensus report, while the other three plots show the distribution of the consensus scores for the different criteria. The total number of proposals evaluated in each call is also shown. STE: scientific excellence, IPT: impa...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Rachel Heyard (11013190) (author)
Other Authors:	David G. Pina (20928216) (author), Ivan Buljan (5907242) (author), Ana Marušić (109455) (author)
Published:	2025
Subjects:	Biotechnology Cancer Science Policy Environmental Sciences not elsewhere classified Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified Mathematical Sciences not elsewhere classified use individual evaluations two call years low success rates exploratory comparative analysis bayesian hierarchical model final funding outcomes summarise individual evaluations found large discrepancies 006 proposals submitted algorithmic approach employed consensus meeting reports final funding ranking algorithmic approach consensus reports consensus meeting final ranking bayesian ranking research funding funding schemes funding rankings algorithmic approaches consensus meetings would suggest would allow weakest proposals using data three panels subsequent ranking social sciences shown inconsistency proposals using previous research life science less pronounced help minimise grant proposals decision making curie actions best agreement
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Distributions of the scores after consensus meetings for the 3 different panels for the calls in 2015 and 2019.

Similar Items