The European Research Council (ERC): Funding Opportunities in Europe for Creative Minds from Anywhere in the World Art & Build Architect / Montois Partners / credits: S. Brison Iliana Nikolova Computer Science Panel Coordinator, ERCEA October 2016, Rome
Outline ERC Basics Applying for ERC grants ERC Evaluation process More information Annex: ERC funded projects in Computer Science Overview, FP7 (2007 2013) 2
What is the European Research Council (ERC)? The European funding body supporting excellence in frontier research through bottom-up, individual-based, pan-european competition Legislation Budget: 13 billion (H2020: 2014-2020) - 1.9 billion /year 7.5 billion (FP7: 2007-2013) - 1.1 billion /year Scientific governance: independent Scientific Council with 22 members including the ERC President; full authority over funding strategy Support by the ERC Executive Agency (autonomous) Excellence as the only criterion Strategy Support for the individual scientist no networks! Global peer-review No predetermined topics (bottom-up) Support of frontier research in all fields of science and humanities 23
ERC in H2020 Structure HORIZON 2020 main components: Excellent Science European Research Council Future and Emerging Technologies Marie Skłodoswka Curie Actions Research Infrastructures Industrial leadership Societal challenges 4
ERC Budget in H2020 ERC Budget 13 billion 5
ERC strategic principles: What is special about the ERC? All fields of science and scholarship are eligible Investigator-driven, bottom-up Scientific Excellence is the only criterion PI s team + research project Irrespective of nationality, gender or age of researchers Investment in research talent Attractive, flexible grants, up to five years Under control of the Principal Investigator Independent individual teams in Europe All nationalities can apply Host organisation to be located in EU or Associated Country 6
What does ERC offer? Creative Freedom to Individual Grantee Independence, recognition & visibility to work on a research topic of own choice, with a team of own choice to gain true financial autonomy for up to 5 years to negotiate with the Host Institution the best conditions of work to attract top team members (EU and non-eu) and collaborators to move with the grant to any place in Europe if necessary (portability of grants) to attract additional funding and gain recognition ERC is a quality label 7
Who can apply? PI of any nationality, any age, any current place of work With letter of support by a Host Institution based in EU or associated countries At least 50% of the PI s time has to be spent in EU or AC during the project lifetime. 8
Attractive features for researchers from outside Europe Additional funding for scientists moving to Europe: 500 000 for Starting, 750 000 for Consolidator and 1 Million for Advanced grantees Grantee can keep affiliation with home institute outside Europe Work time in Europe at least 50% Team members can be outside Europe Grantee can move within Europe with the grant 9
ERC Grant Schemes Starting Grants starters (2-7 years after PhD) up to 2.0 Mio for 5 years Consolidator Grants consolidators (7-12 years after PhD) up to 2.75 Mio for 5 years Advanced Grants track-record of significant research achievements in the last 10 years up to 3.5 Mio for 5 years Proof-of-Concept bridging gap between research - earliest stage of marketable innovation up to 150,000 for ERC grant holders 10
ERC Panel Structure Life Sciences LS1 Molecular and Structural Biology and Biochemistry LS2 Genetics, Genomics, Bioinformatics and Systems Biology LS3 Cellular and Developmental Biology LS4 Physiology, Pathophysiology and Endocrinology LS5 Neurosciences and Neural Disorders LS6 Immunity and Infection LS7 Diagnostic Tools, Therapies and Public Health LS8 Evolutionary, Population and Environmental Biology LS9 Applied Life Sciences and Non-Medical Biotechnology Physical Sciences & Engineering PE1 Mathematics PE2 Fundamental Constituents of Matter PE3 Condensed Matter Physics PE4 Physical and Analytical Chemical Sciences PE5 Synthetic Chemistry and Materials PE6 Computer Science and Informatics PE7 Systems and Communication Engineering PE8 Products and Process Engineering PE9 Universe Sciences PE10 Earth System Science Social Sciences and Humanities SH1 Individuals, Markets and Organisations SH2 Institutions, Values, Environment and Space SH3 The Social World, Diversity, Population SH4 The Human Mind and Its Complexity SH5 Cultures and Cultural Production SH6 The Study of the Human Past 11
ERC schemes are highly competitive! Average success rate 12% Starting/Consolidator Grant Advanced Grant 18% 16% 14% 12% 18% 16% 14% 12% 16,1% 13,9% 13,8% 14,1% 13,4% 12,3% 14,4% 10% 8% StG CoG 10% 8% 8,5% 6% 6% 4% 4% 2% 2% 0% 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 12
ERC: After 9 Years, a Success Story 6,000 90,000 40,000 677 13 billion 67
Priority to Young Scientists + 27 000 PhD and post-doc researchers working in ERC teams. Two-thirds of ERC grants go to early-stage Principal Investigators. 14
Outline ERC Basics Applying for ERC grants ERC Evaluation process More information Annex: ERC funded projects in Computer Science Overview, FP7 (2007 2013) 15
ERC Work Programme 2017 Call Calendar ERC calls Budget Call Opening Submission Deadline(s) Starting Grants ERC-2017-StG Consolidator Grants ERC-2017-CoG Advanced Grants ERC-2017-AdG 605 M 26 July 2016 18 October 2016 575 M 20 October 2016 9 February 2017 567 M 16 May 2017 31 August 2017 Proof of Concept ERC-2017-PoC 20 M 2 August 2016 19 January 2017 25 April 2017 5 September 2017 16
Questions to ask yourself as an applicant Am I internationally competitive as a researcher at my career stage and in my discipline? Am I able to work independently, and to manage a 5-year project with a substantial budget? Why is my proposed project important? Does it promise to go substantially beyond the state of the art? Why am I the best/only person to carry it out? Is it timely? (Why wasn't it done in the past? Is it feasible now?) What's the risk? Is it justified by a substantial potential gain? Do I have a plan for managing the risk? 17
How to prepare and submit an ERC research proposal Have a bright, original and exciting idea Design a research project to implement the idea Get a letter of support from a Host Institution where the project is to be carried out (the HI must be located in the EU or any of the H2020 associated countries) Write your research proposal Fully electronic/web based submission system Submit your research proposal before the deadline
Host Institution (HI) Applicant legal entity: an institution that engages and hosts the PI for the duration of the project (25% overheads to HI) Any type of legal entity: universities, research centres, business research units as long as it is in MS or AC Commitment of HI: to ensure that the PI may - apply for funding independently - manage research and funding for the project - publish independently as senior author - have access to reasonable space and facilities
Chose an ERC panel Panel structure: 3 domains and 25 panels Proposals are submitted to a Panel of PI's choice Can flag one Secondary Review Panel PI can explain the interdisciplinary nature of the proposal Transfer of proposals between panels may occur if clear mistake on part of applicant necessary expertise is available in a different panel In case of proposals spanning more than one panel or domain, evaluation by members of other panels possible 20
Preparing an application Register early, get familiar with the system and templates and start filling in the forms A submitted proposal can be revised until the call deadline by submitting a new version and overwriting the previous one Follow the formatting rules and page limits. Download and proof-read the proposal before submitting. Show to colleagues and friends to check for clarity 21
Submission of proposals http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opport unities/index.html Single submission one deadline per Call to a targeted panel of your choice electronically only proposals have two parts: Part A: Administrative forms Part B: Scientific proposal Part B1 (Extended Synopsis + PI s CV and track record) At Step 1 only Part B1 is evaluated Part B2 (Full scientific proposal) At Step 2 both Part B1 and Part B2 are evaluated 22
Online Submission Proposal structure Administrative forms (Part A) 1 General information 2 Administrative data of participating organisations 3 Budget 4 Ethics 5 Call specific questions Part B1 (submitted as pdf) Evaluated in Step 1 & Step 2 Text box - Cross-domain nature explanation a Extended synopsis 5 pages b Curriculum vitae 2 pages Appendix Funding ID c - Track-record 2 pages Part B2 (submitted as pdf) Not evaluated in Step 1 (Step 2 only) Annexes Commitment of the host institution, PhD certificates, etc Scientific proposal 15 pages a State-of-the-art and objectives b Methodology c Resources Guidelines and Recommendations in the 2017 Information for Applicants 23
Outline ERC Basics Applying for ERC grants ERC Evaluation process More information Annex: ERC funded projects in Computer Science Overview, FP7 (2007 2013) 24
How are ERC proposals evaluated? Excellence is the sole evaluation criterion Evaluation of excellence at two levels: Excellence of the Research Project Ground breaking nature Potential impact Scientific Approach Excellence of the Principal Investigator Intellectual capacity Creativity Commitment
Who evaluates the proposals? ERC Panel Members and Remote Referees Panel members (PMs): typically 600 PMs involved per call High-level scientists Recruited by ScC from all over the world About 10-15 PMs and Panel Chair USA (7%) Other (7%) Remote Referees (RRs): typically 2000 RRs involved per call Each RR evaluates only a small number of proposals (typically 1-3) EU (86%) 26
Panel Members by Country & Gender Averaged over the first 19 ERC calls 27% of the ERC panel members were women * Number of instances that experts of a certain country are contributing to the ERC peer review 27
Evaluation procedure (StG, CoG, AdG) Single submission, two-step evaluation STEP 1 STEP 2 Remote assessment by Panel Members of Part B1: Synopsis and PI Panel meeting Remote assessment by Panel Members and Remote Referees of the full proposal: part B1+ B2 Panel meeting + interview (StG + CoG) Proposals rejected (score B & C) Proposals retained for step 2 (score A) Ranked list of proposals (scores A & B) Feedback to applicants Redress
Outcome of Step 1 evaluation Step 1 scoring (A,B,C): A: The proposal is of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation B: The proposal is of high quality but not sufficient to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation C: The proposal is not of sufficient quality to pass to Step 2 of the evaluation All proposals scored A pass to the Step 2 of the evaluation. The proposals scored B and C are rejected and are subject to resubmission restrictions. 29
Outcome of Step 2 evaluation Step 2 scoring (A,B): A: The proposal fully meets the ERC's excellence criterion and is recommended for funding if sufficient funds are available B: The proposal meets some but not all elements of the ERC's excellence criterion and will not be funded The applicants are also informed about the ranking range of their proposal, out of all proposals evaluated by the panel 30
Resubmission restrictions Ever increasing number of applications causes low success rates and high panel workload those who receive a B at Step 1 have to wait out one year before resubmission those who receive a C will have to wait out two years before resubmission those who receive a B at Step 2 can apply next year (no resubmission restrictions) 31
Typical reasons for rejection Principal investigator Insufficient track-record Insufficient leadership profile Proposed project Scope: Too narrow or too broad/unfocussed Incremental research/continuation of previous work Work plan/team composition not detailed enough/unclear Insufficient risk management 32
Some tips and advice (1/3) Be ambitious and 'daring'; panels instructed to seek out high-risk research Grab interest and attention of readers/ reviewers Remember that Part B1 will be seen by 'generalists' (Panel Members) If you make it to Step 2, reviewers see both B1 and B2, so do not repeat / duplicate part B1 in part B2
Some tips and advice (2/3) Do not include unnecessary partners and collaborators; it is not supposed to be a 'consortium' Additional resources (e.g. extra equipment) needs to be explained credibly (not an automatic addition) Remember that Open Access to Publications is now obligatory: include the necessary resources Can now opt-in to the H2020 Open Research Data Pilot: this will not affect the evaluation: evaluators do not see this.
Some tips and advice (3/3) For interviews (StG and CoG): Get Panel Members interested in you and what you are doing Practice thoroughly, several times; typically a 10 minute presentation followed by 10-15 minutes of questions & answers Panels want to see that these are your ideas, not those of your supervisor
Proposal budget considerations Budget analysis carried out in Step 2 evaluation (meeting) Panels have responsibility to ensure that resources requested are reasonable and well justified Budget cuts need to be justified on a proposal by proposal basis (no across-the-board cuts) Panels recommend a final maximum budget based on analysis of the resources Panels do not micro-manage project finances Awards made on a take-it-or-leave-it basis: no negotiations 36
Outline ERC Basics Applying for ERC grants ERC Evaluation process More information Annex: ERC funded projects in Computer Science Overview, FP7 (2007 2013) 37
Some useful tools and links Read Information for Applicants, ERC Guide for Peer Reviewers and ERC Work Programme View the step-by-step video Introduction to application process, including tips & tricks for the interview https://vimeo.com/94179654 Consult ERC website for latest funding opportunities, view ERC funded projects 38
ERC Funded Projects http://erc.europa.eu/erc-funded-projects Menu allows searching by Funding Scheme, Research Area, Country of Host Institution. 39
Statistics on submission and granting Menu allows searching by Funding Scheme, Call year, Domain/Panel and Grantees by Country of Host Institution. 40
ERC Panel Chairs and Panel Members for past calls 41
More Information ERC Website: https://erc.europa.eu or watch: https://player.vimeo.com/video/154715819 Sign up for ERC news alerts: erc.europa.eu/keep-updated-erc National Contact Points: http://erc.europa.eu/national-contact-points Follow us on: www.facebook.com/europeanresearchcouncil twitter.com/erc_research www.linkedin.com/company/european-research-council
Outline ERC Basics Applying for ERC grants ERC Evaluation process More information Annex: ERC funded projects in Computer Science Overview, FP7 (2007 2013) 43
Computer Sciences and Informatics Panel PE6: Overview of FP7 ERC calls (2007 2013) 44
Computer Sciences and Informatics Panel PE6: Evaluated proposals in FP7 (2007 2013) 45
Computer Sciences and Informatics Panel PE6: Funded proposals in FP7 (2007 2013) 46
Computer Sciences and Informatics PE6 Panel: Most successful Host Institutions in FP7 (2007 2013) Host Institution Count ry Proje cts 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% UK DE FR NL IT ES SE BE AT DK FI EL HUPT IE PL CZ CY BG EE HR SI LV SK CH IL NOTR IS PE6 projects All ERC projects French Institute for Research in Computer Science and Automation (INRIA) FR 25 Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL) CH 12 National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) FR 10 Technion Israel Institute of Technology IL 9 University of Oxford UK 9 Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETH Zurich) CH 8 Bar-Ilan University IL 5 Institute of Science and Technology Austria AT 5 University of Edinburgh UK 5 Imperial College UK 4 Technische Universität München DE 4 Tel Aviv University IL 4 University of Bristol UK 4 University of Cambridge UK 4 Weizmann Institute IL 4 Hebrew University of Jerusalem IL 3 Leibniz Universität Hannover DE 3 Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) SE 3 Saarland University DE 3 Technische Universität Darmstadt DE 3 Université libre de Bruxelles (ULB) BE 3 University College London UK 3 University of Athens EL 3 University of Leuven (KU Leuven) BE 3 47 University of Warsaw PL 3
Computer Sciences and Informatics Panel PE6: Main thematic areas funded in FP7 (2007 2013) Theoretical foundations (18%) Computational modelling (17%) 9% 9% 8% 6% 5% ML (4%) AI (3%) Cryptology, security, privacy (13%) Algorithms (9%) Computer graphics and vision (9%) Software engineering (8%) 13% 15% HCII (3%) Big data (6%) Networking (3%) Computing systems (5%) Web science (2%) Machine learning (4%) 17% 18% Artificial Intelligence (3%) Human computer interaction and interface (3%) Networking (3%) Web science (2%) 48
Computer Sciences and Informatics Panel PE6: Main topics funded in FP7 (2007-2013) 49
Computer Sciences and Informatics Panel PE6: Descriptor use by call type (2007-2013) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% PE6_1 Computer architecture, pervasive computing, PE6_2 Computer systems, parallel/distributed PE6_3 Software engineering, operating systems, PE6_4 Theoretical computer science, formal PE6_5 Cryptology, security, privacy, quantum crypto PE6_6 Algorithms, distributed, parallel and network PE6_7 Artificial intelligence, intelligent systems, multi AdG StG/CoG PE6_8 Computer graphics, computer vision, multi PE6_9 Human computer interaction and interface, PE6_10 Web and information systems, database PE6_11 Machine learning, statistical data processing PE6_12 Scientific computing, simulation and PE6_13 Bioinformatics, biocomputing, and DNA and 50
Computer Sciences and Informatics Panel PE6: Cross-panel projects in FP7 (2007-2013) Secondary panels selected by projects funded by the PE6 panel 51
Computer Sciences and Informatics PE6 keywords appear in 90 projects from other ERC panels 52
THANK YOU! QUESTIONS? 53
Annex 54
ERC Starting and Consolidator Grants 2017 The applicant s profile Am I competitive enough? Potential for research independence Evidence of scientific maturity At least one (StG) /several (CoG) publications without participation of PhD supervisor For StG: PhD at least 2 and up to 7 years before 1 January 2017 For CoG: PhD over 7 and up to 12 years before 1 January 2017 Promising track-record of early achievements Significant publications (also without PhD supervisor) Invited presentations at conferences Funding, patents, awards, prizes All these need to be shown in your proposal that will include your CV and an early achievements track record. 55
Extensions of eligibility window Extensions of eligibility window possible for StG and CoG for documented cases of: Maternity 18 months per child (before or after PhD) Paternity actual time taken off Military service Medical speciality training Caring for seriously ill family members No limit to the total extension
Submission of Proposals Differences in Part B1 and Part B2 In Step 1: Panel members see only Part B1 of your proposal: Pay particular attention to the ground-breaking nature of the research project no incremental research. State-of-the-art is not enough. Think big! Know your competitors what is the state of play and why is your idea and scientific approach outstanding? Only the extended Synopsis is read at Step 1: concise and clear presentation is crucial (evaluators are not necessarily all experts in the field) Outline of the methodological approach (feasibility) Show your scientific leadership in your CV (model CV provided in the part B1 template) 57
Submission of Proposals Differences in Part B1 and Part B2 In Step 2: Both Part B1 and B2 are assessed by internal panel members and sent to specialists around the world (specialised external referees) Do not just repeat the synopsis Provide details on methodology, work plan, selection of case studies etc. (15 pages) Check coherency of figures, justify requested resources Explain involvement/profile of team members Provide alternative strategies to mitigate risk 58
ERC applications General Tips Re-applying grantees: a significant boost in their scientific output is expected, should be clear from track record Budget and cost items: need to be justified and reasonable in light of the proposal requirements (keep in mind 25% overhead) Check consistency between A3 budget forms and part B2 59