Versionen im Vergleich

Schlüssel

  • Diese Zeile wurde hinzugefügt.
  • Diese Zeile wurde entfernt.
  • Formatierung wurde geändert.
Kommentar: zurückgeholt von v. 107

...

  • needs to be uploaded as a prepared document in PDF format,
  • is written in English,
  • can be written in LaTeX based on the LaTeX main_proposal_template_v1.23. This template includes all relevant aspects like project description, computational facets and resource estimation. The LaTeX template includes both proposal types: initial and follow-up.

Depending on the /wiki/spaces/PUB/pages/425995, the main proposal has to satisfy a prescribed layout. The layout is given in the following samples.:

  • Initial proposal: layout sample with the two main sections
    • scientific part
    • technical part
  • Whitelist proposal: layout sample
    • with one main section only, the technical part
    • upload the proposal and acceptance of one of the funding institutions BMBF, DFG, EU, NHR, or GCS
  • pdf sample
  • Follow-up proposal: layout pdf sample with the two main sections
    • scientific part (brief update) and reference to the initial proposal
    • technical part

Both the LaTeX template and the pdf samples internally differentiate between a normal and a shorter version in case of

Please avoid:
  • Imprecise or incomprehensible estimation of requested computational resources (especially core-hours); for example, missing arguments to justify a certain number of N runs instead of a smaller number. One page is our recommended minimum.
  • No proof, that the software to be used is suitable and efficient for parallel execution (and parallel I/O) on our current HPC systems architecture. Recycling a scalability demo by a third party is meaningless, without showing that your planned production run is fully comparable to it (algorithm selection within the software, I/O pattern, machine architecture, problem size per core).
  • The overall aim and/or motivation behind the project is unclear.
  • The applicant lacks HPC/Unix skills and an experienced co-applicant is missing.
  • Insufficiency of the applicant's local resources is not indicated.
  • The NHR and/or HLRN was not mentioned in relevant publications.
  • Cut & paste of previous proposals.

...

All present, compute projects that have been successfully reviewed by the Scientific Board are listed on the project list. Each proposal for a compute project needs to submit a public abstract in PDF format based on the public abstract template (English/German). It should be generally understandable.

The abstract is written in English or in German and should contain about 2 pages.

...