CAJ | 학술논문

本文分析、比较了国外著名科学资助机构近年来有关高风险探索性项目的典型评议机制,在借鉴其经验的基础上,结合我国科学基金的实际,提出了一种互动启发式评议机制。该机制依托专门的会议论坛为评议平台,通过申请者与评审者现场交流、讨论与交锋,在互动中实时遴选出值得资助的项目。互动启发式评议机制能够克服传统同行评议方式在遴选高风险探索性项目时的保守性缺位等不足,成为传统同行评议方式的扩展与补充。
본문분석、비교료국외저명과학자조궤구근년래유관고풍험탐색성항목적전형평의궤제,재차감기경험적기출상,결합아국과학기금적실제,제출료일충호동계발식평의궤제。해궤제의탁전문적회의론단위평의평태,통과신청자여평심자현장교류、토론여교봉,재호동중실시린선출치득자조적항목。호동계발식평의궤제능구극복전통동행평의방식재린선고풍험탐색성항목시적보수성결위등불족,성위전통동행평의방식적확전여보충。
Several typical reviewing mechanisms for the assessment of high-risk exploratory research projects in famous foreign science funding agencies are compared and analyzed.On this basis,combined with the actual conditions of National Nature Science Foundation of China,an interactive heuristic reviewing mechanism is proposed.This mechanism relies on a special forum,by means of instant argument and confrontation between applicants and reviewers,the projects that are worth supporting are identified.This interactive heuristic reviewing mechanism overcomes the shortcoming of traditional peer review mechanism when it is used to identify exploratory pioneering projects often conservativeness falls vacant.The proposed mechanism could become a complementary and extension mechanism for peer review.