1 / 14

Disclaimers

Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace ( SaTC ) “Top 10” Tips for SaTC Proposals One program director’s observations Sol Greenspan. Disclaimers. Talk shares some observations about proposals Observations you might glean from panels Not an official NSF FAQ – just my opinions

gur
Download Presentation

Disclaimers

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC)“Top 10” Tips for SaTC ProposalsOne program director’s observationsSol Greenspan

  2. Disclaimers Talk shares some observations about proposals • Observations you might glean from panels • Not an official NSF FAQ – just my opinions • Other program directors may have their own lists • Use your own judgment • “Top 10” ? Not humorous, and there are 11 

  3. Title and Project Summary 10 Make as clear and straight-forward as possible • Used to decide if proposal is in scope of SaTC (and/or other) program • Used to sort proposals into SaTC panels • Avoid distracting digressions, allusions, puns, ambiguities. Metaphors only if really good. • Multiple program directors may read them, with varying degrees of expertise in the main thrusts of the proposal

  4. Why is the research important? 9 Explain why the research is important to fund • Don’t assume the reviewers know why – tell them • What is the relationship of your research to “big questions” in the field? • Explain both intellectual merit and broader impacts, short-term and long-term, goals and possibilities • Bottom line: why should the nation invest in this research?

  5. Comparison to related work 8 Explain what makes your project “competitive” • Establish that your work has not been done already by others and will be a significant advancement • Need more than “others working on this problem are [refs]” and “so-and-so takes a similar but different approach [refs] • Not helpful to say “malware has been much studied [see refs 1-23, 46-61, 78, 99, 120]” • Use related work to justify approach, highlight originality, comparative effectiveness, potential breakthroughs, etc.

  6. Prior Work by You 7 Clearly explain the new work to be done • Most research directions go beyond a single project • Where does the prior work end and the new work start? • Don’t make readers guess how your recent publications relate to the proposed project • Explain how prior/preliminary work validates assumptions, justifies further exploration • NSF requires mention of IM and BI for prior grants

  7. Project Management/Coordination 6 Give reader confidence that there will be executive functioning at work • Collaboration Plan required for Frontiers and Medium proposals with more than one PI • Explain how you will coordinate people and activities to achieve the overall vision. • The reader wants a sense that the people and resources are well-reasoned and appropriate for the project, and that some strategic thinking will take place over the course of the project

  8. Research Process 5 Show that you have thought about contingencies • Research outcomes are not predictable. What decision points might you encounter? How will you mitigate? • Allow for unexpected results and dynamic changes in direction • What is the process to refine your theories, algorithms, models, etc. ? • Sometimes the research requires novelty/creativity and is a contribution in itself

  9. Research Evaluation 4 Explain how you will evaluate progress and results • What are you evaluating? • How will you evaluate it? • How do others do evaluation in this area? • What is considered an advancement? • Do benchmarks exist (or are you developing them)? • Sometimes evaluation methods require development and are contributions in themselves

  10. Pursuit of Science 3 Where is the Science? (Engineering) • Building a body of long-lasting knowledge • Devising theories that explain phenomena (represented by data, models algorithms, software, etc.) • Problem characterization and solution discovery • Paradigm shifts, different ways to conceptualize the problems, open to new and better solutions • Again: Conscious, explicit evaluation to show advances in the field • Community resources and activities

  11. SaTC Mission 2 How does your proposal support the SaTC mission? • Topically connected: Security, privacy, etc. (e.g., ACM taxonomy) • Threats, attack models, evolving societal scenarios, etc. • Foundational (software, hardware, networks, systems, formal methods, etc.) with strong connection to SaTC • National needs and priorities (e.g., CNCI, CSIA): designed-in security, moving target, tailored trustworthy spaces, science of security, cyber-economics www.whitehouse.gov, www.nitrd.gov

  12. Broader Impacts 1 Concrete activities • What is your contributionto the SaTC mission? • You will publish, educate/train, and develop curriculum • Impact on other fields of research • Impact on business/industry or on society • Outreach to share knowledge with communities

  13. Your Career 0 What is your passion? • Work on topics that you believe in and motivate you. • Always in the process of building a track record. • Network with others to build community around important areas and accelerate the pace of research. • Propose your best ideas

  14. The End • Further comments/suggestions from PIs? • Further comments/suggestions from PDs? Sol Greenspan sgreensp@nsf.gov

More Related