2021 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship (HE-MSCA-PF-2021)

[michelef]

Checking the table that we are building together I realized that someone with my same panel (CHE), same type of fellowship (GF) and first letter of acronym very close to mine (S vs P) went to ranking the 1st of march while I went to ranking on the 2nd. This seems to invalidate the theories of acronym order and panels order, and goes again in the direction of ranking by score, which is quite bad for me by the way.

(https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... =782972678)

I'm in the same situation as you and indeed, it sounds bad for us...

New hypothesis: those who went to ranking on March 1st in the morning got the grant (EF and GF) and the rest is in waiting list (the rest of the EF went to ranking on March 1 afternoon, and the GF on March 2)

Hmm… in SOC EF it looks pretty clear that A-O or A-P were ranked 1 March and the rest on 2 March.

Yeah if the phase-change time would be indicative of success or score, it would be very weird as score/success would also somehow correlate with the initial letter of the acronym (at least based on these limited observations)

[UKR]

Then, time that they went from Submission to evaluation to ranking matters.

I'm in the same situation as you and indeed, it sounds bad for us...

New hypothesis: those who went to ranking on March 1st in the morning got the grant (EF and GF) and the rest is in waiting list (the rest of the EF went to ranking on March 1 afternoon, and the GF on March 2)

Hmm… in SOC EF it looks pretty clear that A-O or A-P were ranked 1 March and the rest on 2 March.

Yeah if the phase-change time would be indicative of success or score, it would be very weird as score/success would also somehow correlate with the initial letter of the acronym (at least based on these limited observations)

[Maaaastricht]

I'm in the same situation as you and indeed, it sounds bad for us...

New hypothesis: those who went to ranking on March 1st in the morning got the grant (EF and GF) and the rest is in waiting list (the rest of the EF went to ranking on March 1 afternoon, and the GF on March 2)

Hmm… in SOC EF it looks pretty clear that A-O or A-P were ranked 1 March and the rest on 2 March.

I was also ranked in 1 March - SOC-EF, P.

Not sure about the time. I checked around 19:00 - and I didnt check before it.

So that is consistent, A-P. That would also make sense in terms of the common letters likely being R, S, T and therefore these will have more proposals.

[dw2022]

Hmm… in SOC EF it looks pretty clear that A-O or A-P were ranked 1 March and the rest on 2 March.

I was also ranked in 1 March - SOC-EF, P.

Not sure about the time. I checked around 19:00 - and I didnt check before it.

So that is consistent, A-P. That would also make sense in terms of the common letters likely being R, S, T and therefore these will have more proposals.

I also noticed and agreed with the pattern in SOC, mine is S and ranking on the 2nd morning.

so far, we got n = 25 in SOC (4GF, 21EF) in the google doc and 11 out of 25 (not much indeed, all EF) have provided their date and timing of phase change (to ranking) that likely support this pattern.

ranking on March 1st (n = 6): I, B, I, P, M, N
ranking on March 2nd (n = 5): R, U, S, S, T
evaluation (n = 6): N, E, D, R, U*, M*
unknown when to ranking (n = 8): S, L, S, C, P, S*, F, L*

*GF

but indeed, not likely to be the case in other panels...
So, it is also possible that SOC is just a coincidence.

******* update: one more /ranking on March 2nd/ and is R *******
ranking on March 1st (n = 6): I, B, I, P, M, N
ranking on March 2nd (n = 6): R, U, S, S, T, R
evaluation (n = 6): N, E, D, R, U*, M*
unknown when to ranking (n = 8): S, L, S, C, P, S*, F, L*

[UKR]

To make a clear pattern we need that many of the applicants fill the form.

I was also ranked in 1 March - SOC-EF, P.

Not sure about the time. I checked around 19:00 - and I didnt check before it.

So that is consistent, A-P. That would also make sense in terms of the common letters likely being R, S, T and therefore these will have more proposals.

I also noticed and agreed with the pattern in SOC, mine is S and ranking on the 2nd morning.

so far, we got n = 25 in SOC (4GF, 21EF) in the google doc and 11 out of 25 (not much indeed, all EF) have provided their date and timing of phase change (to ranking) that likely support this pattern.

ranking on March 1st (n = 6): I, B, I, P, M, N
ranking on March 2nd (n = 5): R, U, S, S, T
evaluation (n = 6): N, E, D, R, U*, M*
unknown when to ranking (n = 8): S, L, S, C, P, S*, F, L*

*GF

but indeed, not likely to be the case in other panels...
So, it is also possible that SOC is just a coincidence.

[AnotherCandidate]

To make a clear pattern we need that many of the applicants fill the form.

So that is consistent, A-P. That would also make sense in terms of the common letters likely being R, S, T and therefore these will have more proposals.

I also noticed and agreed with the pattern in SOC, mine is S and ranking on the 2nd morning.

so far, we got n = 25 in SOC (4GF, 21EF) in the google doc and 11 out of 25 (not much indeed, all EF) have provided their date and timing of phase change (to ranking) that likely support this pattern.

ranking on March 1st (n = 6): I, B, I, P, M, N
ranking on March 2nd (n = 5): R, U, S, S, T
evaluation (n = 6): N, E, D, R, U*, M*
unknown when to ranking (n = 8): S, L, S, C, P, S*, F, L*

*GF

but indeed, not likely to be the case in other panels...
So, it is also possible that SOC is just a coincidence.

Is this doc shared in the Facebook group? I don't have access this group

[dw2022]

To make a clear pattern we need that many of the applicants fill the form.

I also noticed and agreed with the pattern in SOC, mine is S and ranking on the 2nd morning.

so far, we got n = 25 in SOC (4GF, 21EF) in the google doc and 11 out of 25 (not much indeed, all EF) have provided their date and timing of phase change (to ranking) that likely support this pattern.

ranking on March 1st (n = 6): I, B, I, P, M, N
ranking on March 2nd (n = 5): R, U, S, S, T
evaluation (n = 6): N, E, D, R, U*, M*
unknown when to ranking (n = 8): S, L, S, C, P, S*, F, L*

*GF

but indeed, not likely to be the case in other panels...
So, it is also possible that SOC is just a coincidence.

Is this doc shared in the Facebook group? I don't have access this group

this one:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... =782972678

[pkourtes]

The (early) Ranking does not make sense to be associated with success.
61 out of 75 have a Ranking, 30 on the 1st (several people don't know the date).
The whole thing doesn't make sense. Only if the majority of this forum are awardees.
As my NCP said,Ranking is just the proposals that got a final score above 70, and they were uploaded to the system.
Evaluation is either proposal with a score below 70, or proposals with a review+score that has not been accepted by the vice-chairs, and they were returned to the evaluators, or that they have just not been uploaded yet.

[EF-LIF-2021]

The (early) Ranking does not make sense to be associated with success.
61 out of 75 have a Ranking, 30 on the 1st (several people don't know the date).
The whole thing doesn't make sense. Only if the majority of this forum are awardees.
As my NCP said,Ranking is just the proposals that got a final score above 70, and they were uploaded to the system.
Evaluation is either proposal with a score below 70, or proposals with a review+score that has not been accepted by the vice-chairs, and they were returned to the evaluators, or that they have just not been uploaded yet.

That's not true. The line between funded and not funded can be in minutes. Moreover, the logic of ranking list creation is clearly described in document which I shared earlier.

A lot of misinterpretation, that's my last post, I'm gonna wait for results and then we can imply some conclusions.

[Cr@zyChem]

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/eur ... 69.article

The article did not make it clear, though, if successful applicants will be notified first.