Honestly it is a bit imperscrutable. From what I understand, the panel approves the scores of the referees; once they approved all scores, they input them in the system; the system ranks them; the panel then discusses what to do with ex-aequo.Kaepirinha wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 2:46 pmThis says what the other guy: gogoboy was suggesting. The change to ranking depends on when the evaluator reviews it as it automatically goes to ranking after that...so please.. do not create anxiety regarding ranking time and success because there is no correlation.goshgoshgosh wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 1:57 pmI found something that may be useful:
4. Panel review
During the panel reviews, the Chairs and Vice-Chairs are invited to perform another quality check of the
ESRs, and may adjust the comments and exceptionally the scores if duly justified and if fully endorsed by
the panel.
After Panel finalises its work, proposals are automatically ranked by the SEP system in descending order of
the total score in their respective panel ranking list. Any ex aequo cases are also discussed and resolved by
the panel before the final approval of the ranking lists by the Panel.
https://rea.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2 ... Europe.pdf
So it is legitimate to think that one switches to the "ranking" phase when they input the scores in the system.
But this does not explain why one changes to ranking at different times despite being in the same panel.
Another explanation is that the panel inputs data after every meeting session. This would explain the batches. If the evaluations are checked not randomly, for instance from the highest score to the lowest, this would explain also the sensation one has from reading last year's spreadsheet, that is, that those who switch to "ranking" first have on average a higher score.