CS295J/Research proposal before.11: Difference between revisions

From VrlWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
[[image:Brain_Circuits_Software_Infrastructure_2010_NSF.pdf]]: Proposal submitted to NSF on 6/14/2010.  The title is: Cognition-Aware Visual Analytics of Brain Circuits.  The "science", as it's known, includes the Project Summary (pdf page 11) and the Project Description (pdf pages 14-27).  I left the remaining pages in to provide context for those unfamiliar with some of the details that are included in grant proposals.  I did remove the budget specifics for privacy reasons.
[[image:Brain_Circuits_Software_Infrastructure_2010_NSF.pdf]]: Proposal submitted to NSF on 6/14/2010.  The title is: Cognition-Aware Visual Analytics of Brain Circuits.  The "science", as it's known, includes the Project Summary (pdf page 11) and the Project Description (pdf pages 14-27).  I left the remaining pages in to provide context for those unfamiliar with some of the details that are included in grant proposals.  I did remove the budget specifics for privacy reasons.


[[/NSF_Brain_Circuits_Reviews]]
The [[/NSF_Brain_Circuits_Reviews|reviews]] for this proposal are not well formated, but you will find four of them as well as a summary of the discussion at the study section -- the summary is first.

Revision as of 19:45, 7 September 2011

This page includes the proposals that class will start from. Understanding these proposals and the gaps in them should help us to produce a better proposal over the semester.

File:Brain Circuits Software Infrastructure 2010 NSF.pdf: Proposal submitted to NSF on 6/14/2010. The title is: Cognition-Aware Visual Analytics of Brain Circuits. The "science", as it's known, includes the Project Summary (pdf page 11) and the Project Description (pdf pages 14-27). I left the remaining pages in to provide context for those unfamiliar with some of the details that are included in grant proposals. I did remove the budget specifics for privacy reasons.

The reviews for this proposal are not well formated, but you will find four of them as well as a summary of the discussion at the study section -- the summary is first.