Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
1. Excellence (Threshold: 0.00/5.00 , Weight: 50.00%) The following aspects will be considered when assigning an overall score for this criterion: Quality, innovative aspects and credibility of the research (including inter/multidisciplinary aspects) Clarity and quality of transfer of knowledge/training for the development of researcher in light of the research objectives Quality of the supervision and the hosting arrangements Capacity of the researcher to reach or re-enforce a position of professional maturity in research 5.00/5.00 I The project has a very clear objective and demonstrated a credible plan where it will go beyond the current state-ofthe-art. The integration of industrial expertise completes the very good overall concept. The interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary aspects of the project are clearly demonstrated. The project presents clearly the approach and knowledge transfer from the fellow to the host organization and the benefits for the host organization. The host institution has installed a team of supervisors, where each has a clear role and focus. This overall concept is very good. The supervision is of high quality as the supervisors are senior researcher with a long experience in the field. The practical and administrative arrangements and support for the hosting are appropriate. The researcher has a good opportunity to reach a position of professional maturity in research. The fellow´s profile matches very well with the proposed project. Panel ENG 5.00/5.00 Strengths of the proposal II The Project is innovative and of high scientific and technical quality and it is focused on a Tm-doped fibre laser technology. The state of the art is clearly described and related references are satisfactory. The novelty of the proposed research is analysed in sufficient detail. The interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary and intersectorial aspects of the proposal are adequately described. The training objectives of the proposal will provide benefit to the development of an independent research career. The quality of the host supervisor is very high and includes participation in projects, publications, patents and demonstrates a relevant track record of previous training achievements within the proposed field of research. The host is a UK University with a high level of experience and high reputation. The practical arrangements in place to host the researcher are convincingly described. Although the candidate experience after PHD graduation (2014) is limited, the potential to reach professional maturity through the fellowship is well demonstrated 4.50/5.00 III The current research challenges, research objectives and approach and originalities are well described. The researcher will benefit from the rich program of secondments in a multidisciplinary and focused to the topic consortium, including an industrial secondment. The training and transfer of knowledge objectives both from the host to the researcher and from the researcher to the host is very well described in the proposal according to the four specific research objectives. The researcher has very strong academic skills and he will have chance to improve himself for re-enforcing a position of professional maturity in research with this proposal. The benefits for the researcher and for the organisation are well described. The quality of supervision is well supported by relevant information. Weaknesses of the proposal I II None No major weaknesses were found. Panel ENG III Possible limitations and disadvantages of proposed method and measures to overcome them are not clearly presented. The specific hosting arrangements for the researcher are not well described in the proposal. 2. Impact (Threshold: 0.00/5.00 , Weight: 30.00%) The following aspects will be considered when assigning an overall score for this criterion: Enhancing research- and innovation-related human resources, skills, and working conditions to realise the potential of individuals and to provide new career perspectives Effectiveness of the proposed measures for communication and results dissemination 5.00/5.00 4.80/5.00 4.60/5.00 Strengths of the proposal I The project is likely to contribute to European excellence in science. New career perspectives are assured. The project demonstrates a very strong potential to increase the competencies of the researcher especially through experience with the beneficiary hosts and the host for the secondments. The benefits both for the fellow and for the host are well demonstrated. The publication of papers and presentations and participation in international conferences and workshops are well considered. The resources are well estimated and effective measures for communication are proposed. The dissemination activities are well planned. The exploitation of the results is considered. The host demonstrates a very good experience in dealing with intellectual property rights. Panel ENG II The proposed training program address very important objectives related to the applicant's academic development, the industrial involvement and the quality of the supervision. The partnering organizations offer the applicant the possibility of gaining experience from an international setting. The candidate will acquire a relevant experience in laser engineering and in advanced modelling methods. The communication and the public engagement strategy are satisfactory. The proposed outreach activities are convincing and measurable. The dissemination of the research results will be achieved through publications in high-impact journals and presentations. Intellectual Property and exploitation of results are specifically addressed. III The proposal has a potential to contribute European research area in the field of tunable mode fibre laser. The proposed research will pave way to decrease power consumption and impacting the environment. The proposal will contribute EU-Malaysia collaboration. Exploitation and IPR issues are well described. Weaknesses of the proposal I (successful) None Panel ENG II It is not sufficiently detailed how the various actions mentioned are tailored to the applicant's particular needs, in order for the candidate's full potential to be realized III Career Development Plan is addressed in a general manner and not sufficiently structured in time. Dissemination activities are generic. 3. Implementation (Threshold: 0.00/5.00 , Weight: 20.00%) The following aspects will be considered when assigning an overall score for this criterion: Overall coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks and resources Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including quality management and risk management Appropriateness of the institutional environment (infrastructure) Competences, experience and complementarity of the participating organisations and institutional commitment 4.70/5.00 I The project presents a well thought out work plan, well planned work packages, tasks, deliverables, milestones and secondments, with a great level of detail. The presented management structures are appropriate. Competences and experiences of all participating organizations are excellent. The practical arrangements for the implementation and management of the research project are well described. The infrastructure, facilities and international collaborations of the host are very good to execute the proposed project. The participating organizations are experienced and complementary in this field. Institutional commitment is assured. The project demonstrates that the institutions providing the secondment have also the needed facilities and infrastructure to guarantee the success of the project The consortium is well balanced and the knowledge qualities are complementary. The scientists in charge of supervising the researcher are excellent. The team has a significant theoretical and practical experience in the area. Panel ENG 4.80/5.00 Strengths of the proposal II A coherent and effective work plan is presented. The project phases and milestones are very well elaborated. The allocation of tasks and resources are adequate to reach the goals. The management structure is appropriate and adequate procedures are in place. Progress monitoring, including a personal career development plan, is convincingly included in the project. The assessment of the possible risks and contingency plans is well described. The available infrastructures in the host institution are very good and adequate for the project execution. Practical and administrative arrangements and support for the hosting of the fellow are well presented. Strong connection with industry is anticipated. The participating organizations from Academia and industrial companies are experienced. They provide the project with complementary scientific and industrial aspects. The fellowship will be beneficial for both the Experienced Researcher, the host organization and the project partners. 4.20/5.00 III The workpackages, major deliverables and secondments are well described and are included in the Gantt Chart. The participating organizations have a complementary competence profile and substantially enrich the fellowship potential. Each work package includes five tasks. The allocation of the tasks and resources is suitable. The defined management structures and procedures (e.g. progress monitoring, assessment of the possible risks and contingency plans, Intellectual Property Rights) are good. The host has very strong background in the field of fibre lasers and their implementation, which is the proposed research area. The host has also expertise in research skills training program, which the researcher will get high benefit. There is evidence of institutional commitment. Weaknesses of the proposal I (successful) The risk management plan is generic. II The scheduled output may prove to be overambitious given the framework of a timelimited Marie Curie scholarship. III The major milestones are not adequately described and they are not included in the Gantt Chart. The required and existing infrastructures are not well elaborated in the proposal in relation to the fellowship. Deliverables are not fully measurable in terms of outcomes. Risk management and contingency plans are not adequately addressed. Overall Score 98.8% Panel ENG 98% 89.4%