The projects are evaluated in the following categories: scientific readiness, computational readiness and socioeconomic impact. We aim to provide evaluation by two independent, anonymous reviewers with expertise in the project domain. A written evaluation is provided for each category, max 600 characters. The written evaluation aims to support and clarify the numerical score.

The scoring scale

Scores from 0 to 5 are assigned for each category.  
Excelent, all evaluated criteria are above expectations                                                                                                         5
Average, mostly meets evaluated criteria. 3
Poor, fails most evaluated criteria. 0

A maximum of 30 points can be assigned by the two reviewers.Up to 10% of the resources can be distributed among the smallest of the projects within the call. These projects only undergo internal Computational readiness review and are not assigned a score.

The criteria and scoring rules

For all categories, the reviewer deliberates to what extent the listed criteria are fulfilled. When assigning the score, the reviewer applies the first matching rule, starting from the top.

Scientific readiness

Criteria:
  1. Aims and objectives are clearly defined, scientifically relevant and attainable.
  2. Methods to achieve the aims are defined, relevant and state of the art.
  3. The impact of the research is significant, contributes to the domain, and research outcomes with high scientific, industrial or societal impact are to be expected.
Scoring rules:
Rule Points
The application is directly related to solving an approved H2020, ERC, or EuroHPC research projects or another peer-reviewed international grant programme. 4-5
The application is directly related to solving an approved TAČR, GAČR, or other peer-reviewed national grant programme. 3-4
(5 points in the case of centres of competence, centers of excellence etc.)
The application is not related to peer reviewed grant programme. 0-4

Computational readiness

Criteria:
  1. The computational method is well described.
  2. The computational approach is suitable for supercomputer. The use of supercomputing resources will likely be productive.
  3. The requested resources are justified in detail.
Scoring rules:
Rule Points
Computational methods are well described, and demonstrated to be highly parallel and scalable.
AND
Requested resources are well justified, by e.g. benchmark and extrapolation based on previous experience with similar systems or previous projects.
AND
Explicit calculation of requested resources is provided.		 4-5
Computational methods are well described, and suitable for supercomputer.

The use of supercomputing resources will likely be productive.

AND
Requested resources are justified by a well founded qualified guess.
AND
Explicit calculation of requested resources is provided.		 3-4
Computational methods are not described well or or the likelihood of productive use of the computer time is unclear.
OR
Requested resources are stated without explicit calculation.		 0-3

Socioeconomic impact

Criteria
  1. The project is well motivated in a wider socioeconomic framework.
  2. The results of the project will have positive impacts on society.
Scoring rules:
Rule Points
The project is supported within a collaborative research programme (TAČR, H2020, etc.)
OR
has direct application potential in industry or society
OR
immediate, well-motivated application is demonstrated.		 4-5
The project pursues scientifically strongly motivated basic research.
AND
The results of the project are envisaged to have positive impacts on society in the long term.		 3-4
The project pursues scientifically strongly motivated basic research. 2-3
The project is not scientifically strongly motivated
OR
The socioeconomic impacts are not adequately considered.		 0-2