¿Cómo preparar una propuesta COST?€¦ · 17 1. Identify cases of interest amenable according to...

¿Cómo preparar una propuesta COST?Towards understanding and modelling intense

electronic excitation

2

Website & Social Networks

http://www.cost-ca17126.industriales.upm.es /

@ca17126

3

TUMIEE’s Members

28 COST Member Countries1 Cooperating Member Country2 COST Near Neighbour Countries

206researchers

4

TUMIEE’s overview

CSO approval: 13/04/2018

Start Date: 12/09/2018 End Date: 11/09/2022

Five Grant Periods:

1st Grant Period: 12/09/2018 – 30/04/2019 (Budget: 110.975 €)

2nd Grant Period: 01/05/2019 – 30/04/2020 (Budget: 134.768,50 €)

3rd Grant Period: 01/05/2020 – 30/04/2021

4th Grant Period: 01/05/2021 – 30/04/2022

5th Grant Period: 01/05/2022 – 11/09/2022

5

1ST Grant Period

Kick-off meeting

Brussels

12 Sept. 2018

6

1ST Grant Period

General Meeting & MC Meeting

Madrid

19-20 Nov. 2018

7

1ST Grant Period

Working Group Meeting

Porto

3 March 2019

8

1ST Grant Period

10 STSM

9

2nd Grant PeriodPlanned Activities

Training school (10 days – 28 participants) >14 STSMsA general meeting

10

Q3: Difficult to understand progress beyond state of the art

Q6: Discuss impact on existing scientific communities, e.g., bio synergies

Q7: Plan to involve relevant industrial partners

Q9: Reduce risks by technological cases of interest identified by industry

Q11: Add risk mitigation strategies

Q12: ECI involvement poorly described

Q13: Difficult to judge about the expertise of the network, identify gaps

COST CA17126 – TUMIEESubmission and Evaluation 1 (of 2)

11

12

Enable breakthrough scientific developments leading to new concepts and productsConnecting scientific communitiesProviding opportunities for ECIs Increasing impact on policy makers

2.1. The COST framework: mission and policies

13

COST funds networking activities; it does not fund research .

2.2. COST Actions

14

My point of view: Present an ambitious scientific project To be carried out by means of networkingShow how networking will be implemented

2.2. COST Actions

15

Develop and experimentally validate a computational methodology to simulate the physical phenomena and the resulting effects that occur upon materials irradiation in intense electronic excitation conditions, paying special attention to smart strategies to combine solutions for restricted scopes (timescales) into a functional multiscale formalism

COST CA17126 – TUMIEEMain Challenge

16

Case Focus on

Laser-induced plumeformation

Ionization, hydrodynamics

Laser-generated particlebeams

Ionization, non-termal emission

Nuclear materials Electron-lattice coupling, permanenteffects

Ultra-fast optics Electron dynamics

Medical therapy Energy deposition, charge emission

Medical image Energy deposition

There are many other relevant cases, which, depending on theapplication, will require to put the focus on different aspects affecting the simulationstrategy, in particular, code coupling to cover different timescales

Ene

rgy

dens

ity

COST CA17126 – TUMIEECases of interest

17

1. Identify cases of interest amenable according to scientific and/or industrial relevance.

2. Establish and optimize interfaces between the computational methods (timescales) with validation strategies

3. Identify appropriate strategies to tackle the cases of interestfor every timescale and ways to couple them

4. Take advantage of achievements to tackle other cases of interest

5. Transfer knowledge and code to industry integrating ECIs

6. Disseminate the achievements, develop standard codes in open repositories

COST CA17126 – TUMIEEObjectives

18

COST CA17126 – TUMIEEStructure

19

Position Leader Co-leaderSTSM Coordinator Tzveta Apostolova Biljiana GakovicTraining School Coordinator N. Papadogiannis Layla Martin-SamosScience Communication Manager Helder CrespoWG 1 – Experimental Zoltán Juhász Klaus SokolowskiWG 2 – Electronic excitation Davide Sangalli Myrta GrüningWG 3 – Electron lattice coupling Stephen Fahy Samuel MruphyWG 4 – Macroscopic effects Flyura Djurabekova Teresa Flores-AriasWG 5 – Technology transfer Andrey Solov’yov Philippe Zeitoun

ChairAntonio Rivera

Vice ChairJorge Kohanoff

GH Scientific RepresentativeEduardo Oliva

COST CA17126 – TUMIEEStructure

20

Be anonymous. Do not exceed space limitations.

>5 countries but keep balances (geographical, gender, ECIs, ITCs)

Technical annex Use an example along the document Clear challenge + clear objectives Clear progress beyond the state-of-the-art Added value of networking Identify the impact, how to measure it and risks

Clear work plan, emphasize the role of the network

Fulfill the list of S&T Excellence criteria (e.g., Q1 – is the challenge relevant and timely?)

3.2. Eligibility criteria

21

3.2. Eligibility criteria

S&T EXCELLENCE CRITERIASoundness of the Challenge

Q1 - Is the challenge relevant and timely?

Q2 - Are the objectives presented clear and pertinent to tackle the challenge?

Progress beyond the state-of-the-art and innovation potential.

Q3 - Does the proposal advance the state-of-the-art andintroduce an innovative approach to the challenge?

Added value of networking

Q4 - Is networking the best approach to tackle the challenge?

Q5 - What is the added value of the proposed Network in relation to former and existing efforts at European and/or international level?

22

3.2. Eligibility criteria

IMPACT CRITERIAScientific, technological and/or socio-economic imp acts.

Q6 - Does the proposal clearly identify relevant, and realistic short-term/long-term impacts?

Measures to maximise impact.

Q7 - Does the proposal identify the most relevant stakeholders and present a clear plan to involve them as Action’s participants?

Q8 - Is there a clear and attainable plan for dissemination and/or exploitation of results?

Level of risk and level of potential innovation/bre akthroughs.

Q9 - How well does the proposal succeed in putting forwardpotential innovation/ breakthroughs with a convincing risk/returntrade-off?

23

3.2. Eligibility criteria

IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA Overall Coherence and effectiveness of the work pla n

Q10 - Is the work plan (WGs, tasks, activities, timeframe and deliverables) coherent, realistic and appropriate to ensure the achievement of the objectives?

Q11 - Does the proposal identify the main risks related to the work plan and has a plan for contingencies?

Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures

Q12 - Are the management structure and procedures appropriate?

Network as a whole

Q13 - Does the proposed Network envisage the critical mass,expertise and geographical distribution for addressing thechallenge and the objectives? If not, does the proposal identifythe gaps in the Network and present a clear plan forovercoming the gaps? Are mutual benefits clearly ascertainedin case of involvement of NNC and IPC institutions?

24

Website & Social Networks

http://www.cost-ca17126.industriales.upm.es /

@ca17126