APPENDIX D

PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The committee used the points below to help guide its review of the proposals. The reviewers were asked to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the proposals by considering the following:

Level of scientific merit. This should be evaluated by considering:

1. Potential to advance understanding of an important problem or question in the field
2. Potential for breakthrough science resulting in new discoveries and understanding
3. Impact that successful completion of the proposed research would have on the knowledge, methods, and current barriers in the field
4. Project is scientifically and technologically feasible with clear, well-developed, and appropriate goals, objectives, and approaches to the proposed studies; a plan for analyzing the data was presented or indicated via specific publication

Justification for requested time allocation. This should be evaluated by considering:

1. Clear and well-justified need for time on Anton rather than conventional supercomputers
2. Clear and convincing justification that the length and number of proposed simulation runs and node-hours requested are necessary and sufficient to achieve the scientific objectives

Investigator qualifications and past accomplishments. This should be evaluated by considering:

1. Appropriate experience and training to successfully conduct the proposed studies
2. Evidence of knowledge and prior experience with molecular simulations (indicated by inclusion of biosketch/CV for each of the key personnel listed and an explanation of their role in the proposed plan)
3. Past publications and demonstrated progress from previous Anton allocations or satisfactory explanation of past unused allocation time