|
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n*****1
发帖数: 122 | 1 帮朋友问问大家 这样的rfe应该怎么准备呢？她已经交了9封推荐信了，自认为在推荐
信里已经强调了contribution。应该把之前的信重现organize一下，再强调一下，让以
前的推荐人签字？还是找新的推荐人更好呢？
Evidence of the beneficiary’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic,
athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the
field.
In support of this criterion, you have submitted letters of reference from
various experts in your field. You have also submitted evidence that
establishes that your work has been cited 94 times.
This evidence is not sufficient because while the authors of your letters of
reference do indicate that you are a very talented research scientist, they
do not describe the major significance of your contribution. In addition,
your citations history indicates a moderate level of interest in your work,
but is not, in and of itself, dispositive of the issue of major significance.
To assist in determining whether the beneficiary’s contributions are
original and of major significance in the field, the petitioner may submit:
• Objective documentary evidence of the significance of the
beneficiary’s contribution to the field.
• Documentary evidence that people throughout the field currently
consider the beneficiary’s work important.
• Testimony and/or support letters from experts which discuss the
beneficiary’s contributions of major significance.
• Evidence that the beneficiary’s major significant contribution has
provoked widespread public commentary in the field or has been widely cited.
• Evidence of the beneficiary’s work being implemented by others.
Possible evidence may include but is not limited to:
o Contracts with companies using the beneficiary’s products;
o Licensed technology being used by others;
o Patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant to the field.
Note: letters and testimonies, if submitted, must provide as much detail as
possible about the beneficiary’s contribution and must explain, in detail,
how the contribution was “original” (not merely replicating the work of
others) and how they were of “major” significance. General statements
regarding the important of the endeavors which are not supported by
documentary evidence are insufficient. | h******6
发帖数: 106 | | c*****z
发帖数: 3090 | 3 虽然是马后炮，但是当初推荐信应该保留2~3封，只提交6~7封，来准备RFE，9封太多了
。根据RFE内容，问题出在推荐信以及论证自己的work被implemented上面，应该是推荐
信多而不精，不够strong。
这样的RFE比较有针对性，只要逐条回复就好了。比如，针对implementation，下功夫
找直接implement你的方法的文章，如果能找到“你的方法比conventional方法好”的
语句就最好了。
推荐信wise，letter里不能只说你很牛，很talented，is of extraordinary ability
，每一封推荐信最好都能直接证明你的一篇paper或者一个方向的贡献。我不知道已有
的推荐信还能不能用，但是如果找新的推荐人最好是引用过你文章或者在领域里知道你
在做什么的，信里最好出现推荐人认为“你的方法很好，很实用，很重要，并且自己也
在用”的语句。你在PL里就能highlight起来。
big blesses~
【在 n*****1 的大作中提到】
: 帮朋友问问大家 这样的rfe应该怎么准备呢？她已经交了9封推荐信了，自认为在推荐
: 信里已经强调了contribution。应该把之前的信重现organize一下，再强调一下，让以
: 前的推荐人签字？还是找新的推荐人更好呢？
: Evidence of the beneficiary’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic,
: athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the
: field.
: In support of this criterion, you have submitted letters of reference from
: various experts in your field. You have also submitted evidence that
: establishes that your work has been cited 94 times.
: This evidence is not sufficient because while the authors of your letters of
| h******6
发帖数: 106 | 4 有3封推荐信里写明了推荐人有数篇文章引用了我的工作，在我的工作结果的基础上，
启发他们做了什么方面的研究。
ability
【在 c*****z 的大作中提到】
: 虽然是马后炮，但是当初推荐信应该保留2~3封，只提交6~7封，来准备RFE，9封太多了
: 。根据RFE内容，问题出在推荐信以及论证自己的work被implemented上面，应该是推荐
: 信多而不精，不够strong。
: 这样的RFE比较有针对性，只要逐条回复就好了。比如，针对implementation，下功夫
: 找直接implement你的方法的文章，如果能找到“你的方法比conventional方法好”的
: 语句就最好了。
: 推荐信wise，letter里不能只说你很牛，很talented，is of extraordinary ability
: ，每一封推荐信最好都能直接证明你的一篇paper或者一个方向的贡献。我不知道已有
: 的推荐信还能不能用，但是如果找新的推荐人最好是引用过你文章或者在领域里知道你
: 在做什么的，信里最好出现推荐人认为“你的方法很好，很实用，很重要，并且自己也
| p********r
发帖数: 3243 | 5 证明“MAJOR significance”才是终极目的。
仅仅证明了“significance”，少了“MAJOR”,还是远不够的。
BLESS !! | h******6
发帖数: 106 | 6 除了再提供几封推荐信证明，其他好像完全没办法了。推荐信需要找新的推荐人还是让
原来的推荐人改改？ 多谢！
【在 p********r 的大作中提到】
: 证明“MAJOR significance”才是终极目的。
: 仅仅证明了“significance”，少了“MAJOR”,还是远不够的。
: BLESS !!
| m*****a
发帖数: 636 | | t*********r
发帖数: 4143 | | z*******g
发帖数: 5721 | | C*********r
发帖数: 2671 | 10 建议你多花精力写RL 集中在以下几点：
1）你的publication最major的是什么；
2） 你的publication如何影响了推荐人的工作或者提供了什么pilot information; 着
重写方法，细节，和你的方法是缺一不可的环节；
3)查找你文章里面的关键词（被引用的部分），设身处地思考 出于怎样的考量别人引
用你的文章；
4）如果是introduction被引用 你可以说是pioneer work，selected work and etc...
.;如果是results & discussion或者是experimental你可以详细谢谢你的contribution
，你的supporting work等等。。。 | Z******a
发帖数: 1104 | | g********d
发帖数: 31 | 12 这个是模板RFE，lz不用担心。一开始推荐信交多了，不过必须重新再搞3篇左右独立推
荐信，希望能在推荐信里写出引用具体的例子，比如用了你的结果解决了什么具体问题
，取得了什么没成果。要拼命地吹，写得无节操一点。PL也想相应地组织，把具体对别
人的影响列出来，让IO看了直接跪了那种。祝早过！
【在 n*****1 的大作中提到】
: 帮朋友问问大家 这样的rfe应该怎么准备呢？她已经交了9封推荐信了，自认为在推荐
: 信里已经强调了contribution。应该把之前的信重现organize一下，再强调一下，让以
: 前的推荐人签字？还是找新的推荐人更好呢？
: Evidence of the beneficiary’s original scientific, scholarly, artistic,
: athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the
: field.
: In support of this criterion, you have submitted letters of reference from
: various experts in your field. You have also submitted evidence that
: establishes that your work has been cited 94 times.
: This evidence is not sufficient because while the authors of your letters of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
