1. has important scientific significance or important application prospects, especially for the research on the frontier of discipline development; According to the needs of China's socialist modernization and the characteristics of China's natural resources and conditions, explore new fields of science and technology.
2. Research with novel academic ideas, sufficient arguments, clear research objectives, specific research contents, reasonable and feasible research methods and technical routes, and research that can make new scientific discoveries or make important progress in the near future.
3. Applicants and project team members have the research ability and reliable time guarantee to implement the project, and have basic research conditions.
4. The budget is realistic. Article 3 Under similar conditions, the Science Foundation shall give priority to supporting research projects that meet the following conditions:
1) outstanding young scientists;
2) Scientific workers in ethnic minority areas and remote areas;
3) Research projects carried out under the conditions of State Key Laboratory. Article 4 Supporting innovation is the main purpose of the work funded by the Science Foundation. Special attention should be paid to the discovery and protection of innovative projects in the review. Actively support interdisciplinary research and pay attention to cultivating new disciplinary growth points. Article 5 The projects funded by the Science Foundation shall be evaluated and selected in accordance with the principles of relying on experts, promoting democracy, supporting the best, and being fair and reasonable. Article 6 The evaluation of NSFC projects shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures of preliminary examination, peer review, subject review group review and approval of the meeting of the National Natural Science Foundation of China. Seventh in order to ensure the fairness of the evaluation work, adhere to the withdrawal system.
1) Full-time and part-time members of the Fund Committee may not apply for or participate in the Fund Committee projects, and avoid immediate family members from applying for project review;
2) Members of the discipline evaluation team and part-time experts of NSFC avoid the evaluation activities of projects that they and their immediate family members apply for or participate in. The application projects of the members of the evaluation team and part-time experts need to be voted by secret ballot item by item by the discipline evaluation team, and the affirmative vote can only be passed if it reaches more than 2/3 of the attendees. Eighth experts and staff involved in the evaluation work should strictly abide by the confidentiality provisions of the National Natural Science Foundation of China on the evaluation work, and effectively protect the rights and interests of applicants and reviewers. Chapter II Preliminary Examination Article 9 The Ministry of Science shall be responsible for the preliminary examination of the applied projects, and may recommend not to grant funding under any of the following circumstances:
1) The application procedures are incomplete and the application form does not meet the requirements;
2) Not in line with the scope of support of the Science Fund;
3) The number of applications from applicants or major members of the project team with senior professional and technical positions, plus the number of projects funded by various funds under study, exceeds 2;
4) Low-level duplication with similar research;
5) There is an obvious lack of demonstration basis, or the research method and technical route are obviously unclear, so it is impossible to evaluate;
6) Do not have the research ability to implement the project, or lack basic research conditions;
7) There are too many application funds to be supported by the Science Foundation;
8) Having obtained sufficient funds from other departments;
9) The applicant fails to implement the relevant regulations on the management of projects funded by the Science Fund and fails to make corrections as required; Do not seriously carry out research, do not publish papers, and do not obtain research results. Article 10 For the projects that are not funded after the preliminary examination, the discipline shall fill in the "Form for Examination and Approval of Projects Applied by the National Natural Science Foundation", which shall be examined and approved by the director (deputy director) of the Ministry of Science. Chapter III Peer Review Article 11 Peer review is the basis for selecting projects and shall be implemented by the Ministry of Science. Generally, written comments are made through communication. Twelfth selection of reviewers is the key to peer review, and the research content of the application project should be selected.
1) Select scientific workers who are actually engaged in research work, have profound academic attainments, are active in academic thinking, are familiar with the domestic and international situation of the subject field of the evaluated project, have the ability of evaluation and analysis, have a rigorous style of study, and act fairly as assessors;
2) When selecting reviewers, we should pay attention to the group structure, not only considering professional counterparts, but also considering the coverage of knowledge and the representation of different academic viewpoints and different units;
3) The reviewers of interdisciplinary projects should include experts from different disciplines involved;
4) The reviewers of the high-tech new concept and new idea exploration project (referred to as the high-tech exploration project) must be members of the "863 Plan" expert group. Thirteenth in order to ensure the objectivity and fairness of the evaluation results, each application project is evaluated by five peer experts, including no less than three specific peer review opinions, which can be used as the basis for evaluation. Applications with similar contents should be reviewed by the same expert group as far as possible. Article 14 The assessors shall, with a serious and responsible scientific attitude, put forward specific analysis opinions on the scientific value, academic level, innovation and research conditions of the assessed project, make a realistic evaluation, and fill in the Peer Review Opinions on Projects Applied by the National Natural Science Foundation.