A project review management method for a scientific research project platform

Abstract

The present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform. It relates to the technical field of project review management, and the method includes: inputting basic data of scientific research projects and extracting data to be reviewed; performing platform pre-review in combination with the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed, and determining the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project; assigning review experts and obtaining expert pre-review scores, establishing a project review model through the platform pre-review score, expert pre-review score and expert review value, and performing weighted fusion, when the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, outputting the final review score of the scientific research project; when the final review score of the scientific research project is not lower than the preset review score, determining the scientific research project establishment, and performing project management according to the input results of the basic data of the scientific research project, effectively improving the review efficiency and review accuracy of scientific research project review management.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of project review management, and in particular to a project review management method for a scientific research project platform. Background Art

[0002] With the progress of the times, Internet technology has developed rapidly and has been applied to multiple technical fields. The level of informatization has been continuously improved. With the in-depth research in various technical fields, the corresponding scientific research project applications have increased year by year. However, the existing scientific research project review management is mainly manual review management, and the project application information is paper records. The project review process is complicated and difficult to store, and the project review is easily affected by the subjective judgment of the review experts. Secondly, the review experts need to judge whether the applied scientific research projects are repeated applications and the innovativeness of the scientific research projects. However, there are many historical scientific research projects, and it is difficult for the review experts to make judgments.

[0003] Therefore, the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform. Summary of the invention

[0004] The present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, which is used for inputting basic data of scientific research projects and extracting data to be reviewed; performing platform pre-review in combination with the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed, and determining the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project; assigning review experts and obtaining expert pre-review scores, establishing a project review model through the platform pre-review scores, expert pre-review scores and expert review values, and performing weighted fusion, and when the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than preset parameters, outputting the final review score of the scientific research project; when the final review score of the scientific research project is not lower than the preset review score, determining that the scientific research project is approved, and performing project management according to the input results of the basic data of the scientific research project, effectively improving the review efficiency and review accuracy of scientific research project review management.

[0005] The present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, comprising:

[0006] Step 1: When a new scientific research project review application is added to the scientific research project platform, the basic data of the scientific research project is entered and the data to be reviewed is extracted;

[0007] Step 2: Perform a platform pre-examination on the data to be reviewed. When the similarity between the data to be reviewed and the historical scientific research projects in the historical database is lower than the preset similarity, the platform pre-examination score of the scientific research project is determined based on the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed;

[0008] Step 3: Assign review experts according to scientific research projects and obtain expert pre-review scores. Establish a project review model and perform weighted fusion based on the platform pre-review scores, expert pre-review scores, and expert review values. When the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, output the final review score of the scientific research project.

[0009] Step 4: When the final review score of the scientific research project is not lower than the preset review score, the scientific research project is approved and project management is carried out according to the basic data entry results of the scientific research project.

[0010] According to a project review management method of a scientific research project platform provided by the present invention, basic data of scientific research projects are input and data to be reviewed are extracted, including:

[0011] Entering the basic data of the scientific research project in the preset scientific research project review entry period according to the basic data module of the scientific research project platform, wherein the basic data module includes: scientific research name module, scientific research goal module, expected results module, scientific research personnel module and scientific research planning module;

[0012] If there is a basic data module that has not been entered, an alarm will be issued for data entry in the corresponding basic data module, and basic data will be supplemented when the entry period is exceeded;

[0013] The final input basic data of the scientific research project is extracted to obtain the data to be reviewed, wherein the data to be reviewed includes: main data to be reviewed and auxiliary data to be reviewed.

[0014] According to a project review management method for a scientific research project platform provided by the present invention, determining a platform pre-review score for a scientific research project includes:

[0015] Perform a platform pre-examination based on the auxiliary data to be reviewed. If it is determined that the scientific research project does not have the review qualifications, the platform pre-examination is considered unqualified and a platform pre-examination unqualified alarm is generated;

[0016] Otherwise, historical research projects in the historical database are obtained based on the auxiliary data to be reviewed;

[0017] Data extraction obtains historical review subject data of historical scientific research projects, calculates similarity between the subject data to be reviewed and each historical review subject data, and performs secondary platform pre-review. When the similarity is not lower than the preset similarity, a secondary platform pre-review failure alarm is generated;

[0018] Otherwise, according to the preset scientific research project analysis strategy of the scientific research project platform, the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed are obtained, and the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project is determined in combination with the similarity.

[0019] According to a project review management method of a scientific research project platform provided by the present invention, review experts are allocated according to the relevance between the review experts and the scientific research projects, including:

[0020] Obtain relevant scientific research fields of the scientific research project according to the scientific research project platform and call the corresponding review expert database to build a review expert group for the scientific research project;

[0021] When it is monitored that the review experts of the review expert group already have review tasks during the scientific research project review period, they will be deleted;

[0022] Obtain the social relevance between the review experts and the scientific research project after the first deletion. If the review experts and the scientific research project have social relevance, perform a second deletion;

[0023] Obtain the scientific research relevance between the review experts and the scientific research project after the second deletion, and delete the review experts whose scientific research relevance is lower than the preset relevance for a third time;

[0024] Obtain the number of review experts who conduct project review for the scientific research project from the scientific research project platform, randomly select review experts of the number of review experts from the review expert group after three deletions, and construct the final review expert group for the scientific research project;

[0025] Assign review experts and obtain expert preliminary review scores according to the expert review process of scientific research projects.

[0026] According to a project review management method of a scientific research project platform provided by the present invention, before allocating review experts according to scientific research projects and obtaining expert preliminary review scores, it also includes data processing of review impact data of scientific research projects, including:

[0027] When a scientific research project is being reviewed, the data of the scientific researchers and the data of the assigned review experts of the scientific research project will be fuzzy processed;

[0028] Perform data quantification processing based on the scientific research information of the scientific researcher, obtain the scientific research score of the scientific researcher for the scientific research project, and enter it into the scientific research project;

[0029] Perform text data analysis on the data to be reviewed, and perform data fuzzification on the text data determined to be review-impacting data.

[0030] According to a project review management method for a scientific research project platform provided by the present invention, a project review model is established and weighted fusion is performed. When the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, the final review score of the scientific research project is output, including:

[0031] Obtain the platform pre-examination index of the platform pre-examination score and the expert pre-examination index of the expert pre-examination score, and construct a pre-examination index set;

[0032] Conduct platform pre-examinations for the scientific research projects for a corresponding number of times according to the number of review experts, obtain platform pre-examination scores for a corresponding number of times, determine the index scores of each pre-examination index in the pre-examination index set in combination with the expert pre-examination scores, eliminate the index scores that exceed the index range and uniformly superimpose the remaining index scores to obtain the uniform value and divergence value of each pre-examination index;

[0033] When the uniform value of the same pre-screening indicator is greater than the corresponding divergence value, the pre-screening indicator is determined to be credible;

[0034] Otherwise, the pre-screening indicator is determined to be unreliable and is removed from the pre-screening indicator set;

[0035] Obtain the evaluation experts' satisfaction with each pre-examination indicator in the pre-examination indicator set after the indicators are eliminated based on the scientific research project platform;

[0036] When the indicator review satisfaction is not higher than the preset satisfaction, the pre-examination indicator set after the elimination of the indicator is subjected to secondary elimination of the pre-examination indicator to construct the final pre-examination indicator set of the scientific research project;

[0037] When it is monitored that the scientific research project platform has pre-examination indicator weight settings during the scientific research project review period, the pre-examination indicator weight is obtained;

[0038] Otherwise, obtain the historical indicator weights of historical scientific research projects in the historical database;

[0039] Determine the expert review value of the review expert based on the review expert's historical review projects, and establish a project review model by combining the platform pre-review score and the expert pre-review score;

[0040] Obtaining the indicator range of each pre-examination indicator in the final pre-examination indicator set, performing unified quantification processing on each pre-examination indicator, quantifying the platform pre-examination score and the expert pre-examination score into a quantification range, and obtaining the quantified value of each pre-examination score;

[0041] Performing anomaly detection on the quantized value, and re-quantizing or deleting the quantized value when it is determined that the quantized value is abnormal;

[0042] Calculate the review parameters of the review model according to the final pre-review indicator set, weighted indicator weights and quantified values;

[0043]

[0044]

[0045] Among them, F represents the review parameter of the review model; xi1 represents the indicator review satisfaction of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; wi1 represents the weighted indicator weight of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; f(xi1) represents the final pre-review score of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; y(j1, i1) represents the quantitative value of the j1th pre-review score of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; pj1 represents the expert review value of the pre-review expert corresponding to the j1th pre-review score; a1 represents the platform pre-review score; a2 represents the expert pre-review score; y(j1, i1)∈a1 represents the pre-review score belongs to the platform pre-review score; y(j1, i1)∈a2 represents the pre-review score belongs to the expert pre-review score; n1 represents the number of pre-review indicators in the final pre-review indicator set; m1 represents the number of review experts for scientific research projects;

[0046] When it is monitored that the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, the platform preliminary review score and the expert preliminary review score are weighted and fused according to the review model to output the final review score of the scientific research project.

[0047] According to a project review management method of a scientific research project platform provided by the present invention, project management is performed according to the basic data entry results of the scientific research project, including:

[0048] According to the basic input results of the scientific research project, the scientific research project is stored in the corresponding database of the scientific research project platform, and the final review score of the scientific research project is added to the scientific research name;

[0049] The scientific research project platform stores the preliminary scores of various preliminary review indicators used to review the scientific research projects, and performs data restoration on the review impact data of the scientific research projects that have completed data processing. At the same time, the scientific researchers are notified that the scientific research project review is completed.

[0050] A project review management method for a scientific research project platform provided by the present invention also includes:

[0051] Set access rights for each researcher and review expert according to the scientific research project platform. When legitimate access to the scientific research project platform is detected, the corresponding platform functions are opened according to the access rights;

[0052] When it is detected that a scientific research project has been modified or supplemented, the corresponding platform function will be opened;

[0053] When there are multiple scientific research projects under review and management at the same time on the scientific research project platform, project review and management will be conducted from large to small based on the final review scores of each scientific research project.

[0054] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0055] Input the basic data of scientific research projects and extract the data to be reviewed; conduct platform pre-review based on the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed, determine the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project, and improve the efficiency of scientific research project review management with the assistance of the scientific research project platform; assign review experts and obtain expert pre-review scores, establish a project review model through platform pre-review scores, expert pre-review scores and expert review values, and perform weighted fusion. When the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, output the final review score of the scientific research project, effectively ensuring the review accuracy of the scientific research project review; when the final review score of the scientific research project is not lower than the preset review score, determine that the scientific research project is approved, and perform project management based on the results of the basic data entry of the scientific research project, thereby improving the efficiency of project review management.

[0056] Other features and advantages of the present invention will be described in the following description, and partly become apparent from the description, or understood by practicing the present invention. The purpose and other advantages of the present invention can be realized and obtained by the structures particularly pointed out in the written description and the accompanying drawings.

[0057] The technical solution of the present invention is further described in detail below through the accompanying drawings and embodiments. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0058] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the present invention or the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without paying creative work.

[0059] Figure 1 A schematic flow chart of a project review management method for a scientific research project platform provided in an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0060] In order to make the purpose, technical solution and advantages of the present invention clearer, the technical solution of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below in conjunction with the drawings of the present invention. Obviously, the described embodiments are part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without creative work are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0061] like Figure 1 As shown, an embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, the method mainly includes the following steps:

[0062] Step 1: When a new scientific research project review application is added to the scientific research project platform, the basic data of the scientific research project is entered and the data to be reviewed is extracted;

[0063] Step 2: Perform a platform pre-examination on the data to be reviewed. When the similarity between the data to be reviewed and the historical scientific research projects in the historical database is lower than the preset similarity, the platform pre-examination score of the scientific research project is determined based on the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed;

[0064] Step 3: Assign review experts according to scientific research projects and obtain expert pre-review scores. Establish a project review model and perform weighted fusion based on the platform pre-review scores, expert pre-review scores, and expert review values. When the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, output the final review score of the scientific research project.

[0065] Step 4: When the final review score of the scientific research project is not lower than the preset review score, the scientific research project is approved and project management is carried out according to the basic data entry results of the scientific research project.

[0066] In this embodiment, the scientific research project platform refers to a platform used to execute the scientific research project review process and store scientific research project data.

[0067] In this embodiment, the basic data of scientific research projects, for example, scientific research name data, scientific research target data, scientific research personnel data and scientific research planning data.

[0068] In this embodiment, the data to be reviewed refers to the data obtained by extracting the input basic data of the scientific research project, which is used to reduce invalid data and optimize the efficiency of subsequent project reviews.

[0069] In this embodiment, platform pre-examination refers to the preliminary examination of the similarity, completeness and relevance of scientific research projects by the scientific research project platform. For example, when a scientific research project conducts a platform pre-examination of a scientific research project and determines that the scientific research project is similar to a historical scientific research project, the scientific research project is determined to be a duplicate application and the platform pre-examination fails.

[0070] In this embodiment, the historical scientific research project refers to a stored scientific research project on the scientific research project platform, which is a scientific research project in the same technical field as the scientific research project.

[0071] In this embodiment, the preset similarity refers to the similarity used by the scientific research project platform to determine whether a scientific research project is a duplicate application. For example, when the similarity b1 between scientific research project a1 and historical scientific research project a2 is greater than the preset similarity b2, scientific research project a1 is determined to be a duplicate application.

[0072] In this embodiment, the platform pre-review score refers to the review score of the scientific research project by the scientific research project platform.

[0073] In this embodiment, the expert preliminary review score refers to the review score of the scientific research project by the review experts.

[0074] In this embodiment, the expert review value refers to the accuracy of the review experts' review of the scientific research project.

[0075] In this embodiment, the project review model refers to a model used to accurately review scientific research projects.

[0076] In this embodiment, the review parameter of the project review model refers to the sum of the index review satisfaction of each pre-review index in the project review model. The larger the review parameter, the higher the accuracy of the project review.

[0077] In this embodiment, the final review score of the scientific research project refers to the score obtained by weighted fusion of the scientific research projects according to the project review model whose review parameters are greater than the preset parameters, and is used to evaluate the scientific research projects. For example, if the final review score c1 of scientific research project a1 is lower than the final review score c2 of scientific research project a2, then scientific research project a1 will be given priority in project establishment and scientific research project management.

[0078] In this embodiment, project management based on the results of basic data entry of scientific research projects refers to storing the scientific research projects in a scientific research project database corresponding to the scientific research field, and storing and managing the review data accordingly.

[0079] The beneficial effects of the above technical solution are: by entering the basic data of scientific research projects and extracting the data to be reviewed; conducting platform pre-review combined with the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed, determining the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project; assigning review experts and obtaining expert pre-review scores, establishing a project review model through the platform pre-review scores, expert pre-review scores and expert review values, and performing weighted fusion, when the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, outputting the final review score of the scientific research project; when the final review score of the scientific research project is not lower than the preset review score, determining that the scientific research project is approved, and conducting project management based on the results of the entry of the basic data of the scientific research project, effectively improving the review efficiency and review accuracy of the scientific research project review management.

[0080] The embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, which inputs basic data of scientific research projects and extracts data to be reviewed, including:

[0081] Entering the basic data of the scientific research project in the preset scientific research project review entry period according to the basic data module of the scientific research project platform, wherein the basic data module includes: scientific research name module, scientific research goal module, expected results module, scientific research personnel module and scientific research planning module;

[0082] If there is a basic data module that has not been entered, an alarm will be issued for data entry in the corresponding basic data module, and basic data will be supplemented when the entry period is exceeded;

[0083] The final input basic data of the scientific research project is extracted to obtain the data to be reviewed, wherein the data to be reviewed includes: main data to be reviewed and auxiliary data to be reviewed.

[0084] In this embodiment, the basic data module of the scientific research project platform is used to store corresponding basic data to ensure data security.

[0085] In this embodiment, the preset scientific research project review entry period refers to the entry period for the scientific research project to conduct project review. For example, entry period t1 allows basic data entry to ensure data entry security.

[0086] In this embodiment, the corresponding basic data module data entry alarm and basic data supplementation are performed, so that scientific researchers can supplement the corresponding data according to the alarm data to ensure the integrity of the basic data of the scientific research project.

[0087] In this embodiment, the subject data to be reviewed includes, for example, the main research content and scientific research plan of the scientific research project.

[0088] In this embodiment, the auxiliary data to be reviewed include, for example, scientific research name, scientific research objectives, and scientific researchers.

[0089] The beneficial effects of the above technical solution are: according to the basic data module of the scientific research project platform, the basic data of the scientific research project is entered and the basic data is supplemented during the preset scientific research project review entry period, thereby ensuring the integrity of the data entered into the scientific research project; data extraction of the basic data is conducive to improving the review efficiency of subsequent project reviews.

[0090] The embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, which determines a platform pre-review score of a scientific research project, including:

[0091] Perform a platform pre-examination based on the auxiliary data to be reviewed. If it is determined that the scientific research project does not have the review qualifications, the platform pre-examination is considered unqualified and a platform pre-examination unqualified alarm is generated;

[0092] Otherwise, historical research projects in the historical database are obtained based on the auxiliary data to be reviewed;

[0093] Data extraction obtains historical review subject data of historical scientific research projects, calculates similarity between the subject data to be reviewed and each historical review subject data, and performs secondary platform pre-review. When the similarity is not lower than the preset similarity, a secondary platform pre-review failure alarm is generated;

[0094] Otherwise, according to the preset scientific research project analysis strategy of the scientific research project platform, the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed are obtained, and the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project is determined in combination with the similarity.

[0095] In this embodiment, a platform pre-examination is performed based on the auxiliary data to be reviewed. For example, if the scientific research name is consistent with the scientific research name of a historical scientific research project on the scientific research project platform, the scientific research project is determined to be a duplicate application and does not qualify for review.

[0096] In this embodiment, the secondary platform pre-examination refers to the determination of the similarity between the scientific research project and the historical scientific research project. For example, when scientific research project a1 is reviewed, through the secondary platform pre-examination, it is determined that the scientific research project a1 and the historical scientific research project a2 have the highest similarity b1, and b1 is lower than the preset similarity b2, then it is determined that the scientific research project is not a duplicate application, and the subsequent scientific research project review process can be executed.

[0097] In this embodiment, the relevance of the data to be reviewed refers to the relevance between the main content of the scientific research project and the scientific research field. For example, if the relevance of the data to be reviewed is 0.9, it is determined that the main content of the corresponding scientific research project is consistent with the scientific research content of the scientific research field, and the scientific research project belongs to the corresponding scientific research field.

[0098] The beneficial effects of the above technical solution are: by conducting one platform pre-review and a second platform pre-review on the data to be reviewed, it is effectively ensured that the application for scientific research projects is non-duplicate application; the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed are obtained, and the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project is determined in combination with the similarity, which is conducive to the subsequent accurate review of the scientific research project review.

[0099] An embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, which allocates review experts according to the relevance between the review experts and the scientific research projects, including:

[0100] Obtain relevant scientific research fields of the scientific research project according to the scientific research project platform and call the corresponding review expert database to build a review expert group for the scientific research project;

[0101] When it is monitored that the review experts of the review expert group already have review tasks during the scientific research project review period, they will be deleted;

[0102] Obtain the social relevance between the review experts and the scientific research project after the first deletion. If the review experts and the scientific research project have social relevance, perform a second deletion;

[0103] Obtain the scientific research relevance between the review experts and the scientific research project after the second deletion, and delete the review experts whose scientific research relevance is lower than the preset relevance for a third time;

[0104] Obtain the number of review experts who conduct project review for the scientific research project from the scientific research project platform, randomly select review experts of the number of review experts from the review expert group after three deletions, and construct the final review expert group for the scientific research project;

[0105] Assign review experts and obtain expert preliminary review scores according to the expert review process of scientific research projects.

[0106] In this embodiment, the corresponding review expert database is called to construct the review expert group of the scientific research project. The number of review experts is determined according to the scientific research project platform. For example, the review of scientific research projects in the A-type scientific research field adopts b1 number of review experts to conduct project review.

[0107] In this embodiment, the social relevance between the review expert and the scientific research project after one deletion is obtained. For example, if the review expert has a working relationship with the researchers of the scientific research project, it is determined that the review expert has a social relevance to the scientific research project.

[0108] In this embodiment, scientific research relevance refers to the relationship between the scientific research project and the review expert in the field of scientific research technology. For example, if the scientific research project a1 and the historical scientific research project a2 of the review expert c1 are in competition with each other in the Class A scientific research field, then it is determined that the scientific research project a1 and the review expert c1 have scientific research relevance.

[0109] In this embodiment, if there is social relevance between the review experts and the scientific research project, secondary deletion is performed to avoid affecting the accuracy of the review experts' review of the scientific research project due to social relevance.

[0110] In this embodiment, review experts are assigned according to the expert review process of the scientific research project and expert preliminary review scores are obtained. For example, review experts c1 and c2 are assigned to the first review of the scientific research project, and review experts c3, c5, and c6 are assigned to the second review. The preliminary review scores of the scientific research project by review expert c1 are: innovation d1, beneficialness d3, and feasibility d4.

[0111] The beneficial effect of the above technical solution is: by constructing an expert review group for the scientific research project and conducting multiple deletion and screening, the review efficiency of each review expert is ensured and the accuracy of the review experts' review of the scientific research project is initially and effectively ensured.

[0112] The embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, which includes, before allocating review experts according to scientific research projects and obtaining expert pre-review scores, performing data processing on review impact data of scientific research projects, including:

[0113] When a scientific research project is being reviewed, the data of the scientific researchers and the data of the assigned review experts of the scientific research project will be fuzzy processed;

[0114] Perform data quantification processing based on the scientific research information of the scientific researcher, obtain the scientific research score of the scientific researcher for the scientific research project, and enter it into the scientific research project;

[0115] Perform text data analysis on the data to be reviewed, and perform data fuzzification on the text data determined to be review-impacting data.

[0116] In this embodiment, the data of the scientific researchers of the scientific research project and the data of the assigned review experts are subjected to data fuzzification, for example, the names of the scientific researchers are subjected to data fuzzification.

[0117] In this embodiment, data quantification is performed based on the scientific research information of the scientific researcher, for example, the scientific researcher's undergraduate degree is quantified into a scientific research score a1; the number of historical scientific research projects is b1, and the quantified scientific research score is a2.

[0118] In this embodiment, the review impact data refers to data in the scientific research project that has an impact on the review accuracy of the review experts, such as the name of the scientific researcher and the name of the scientific research unit.

[0119] The beneficial effects of the above technical solution are: data processing is performed on the evaluation impact data of scientific research projects to effectively ensure the security of scientific research project data; data quantification processing is performed on the scientific research information of scientific researchers, which is conducive to subsequent review experts to accurately review scientific research projects and make decisions on the establishment of scientific research projects.

[0120] The embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, which establishes a project review model and performs weighted fusion. When the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, the final review score of the scientific research project is output, including:

[0121] Obtain the platform pre-examination index of the platform pre-examination score and the expert pre-examination index of the expert pre-examination score, and construct a pre-examination index set;

[0122] Conduct platform pre-examinations for the scientific research projects for a corresponding number of times according to the number of review experts, obtain platform pre-examination scores for a corresponding number of times, determine the index scores of each pre-examination index in the pre-examination index set in combination with the expert pre-examination scores, eliminate the index scores that exceed the index range and uniformly superimpose the remaining index scores to obtain the uniform value and divergence value of each pre-examination index;

[0123] When the uniform value of the same pre-screening indicator is greater than the corresponding divergence value, the pre-screening indicator is determined to be credible;

[0124] Otherwise, the pre-screening indicator is determined to be unreliable and is removed from the pre-screening indicator set;

[0125] Obtain the evaluation experts' satisfaction with each pre-examination indicator in the pre-examination indicator set after the indicators are eliminated based on the scientific research project platform;

[0126] When the indicator review satisfaction is not higher than the preset satisfaction, the pre-examination indicator set after the elimination of the indicator is subjected to secondary elimination of the pre-examination indicator to construct the final pre-examination indicator set of the scientific research project;

[0127] When it is monitored that the scientific research project platform has pre-examination indicator weight settings during the scientific research project review period, the pre-examination indicator weight is obtained;

[0128] Otherwise, obtain the historical indicator weights of historical scientific research projects in the historical database;

[0129] Determine the expert review value of the review expert based on the review expert's historical review projects, and establish a project review model by combining the platform pre-review score and the expert pre-review score;

[0130] Obtaining the indicator range of each pre-examination indicator in the final pre-examination indicator set, performing unified quantification processing on each pre-examination indicator, quantifying the platform pre-examination score and the expert pre-examination score into a quantification range, and obtaining the quantified value of each pre-examination score;

[0131] Performing anomaly detection on the quantized value, and re-quantizing or deleting the quantized value when it is determined that the quantized value is abnormal;

[0132] Calculate the review parameters of the review model according to the final pre-review indicator set, weighted indicator weights and quantified values;

[0133]

[0134]

[0135] Among them, F represents the review parameter of the review model; xi1 represents the indicator review satisfaction of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; wi1 represents the weighted indicator weight of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; f(xi1) represents the final pre-review score of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; y(j1, i1) represents the quantitative value of the j1th pre-review score of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; pj1 represents the expert review value of the pre-review expert corresponding to the j1th pre-review score; a1 represents the platform pre-review score; a2 represents the expert pre-review score; y(j1, i1)∈a1 represents the pre-review score belongs to the platform pre-review score; y(j1, i1)∈a2 represents the pre-review score belongs to the expert pre-review score; n1 represents the number of pre-review indicators in the final pre-review indicator set; m1 represents the number of review experts for scientific research projects;

[0136] When it is monitored that the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, the platform preliminary review score and the expert preliminary review score are weighted and fused according to the review model to output the final review score of the scientific research project.

[0137] In this embodiment, platform pre-review indicators of the platform pre-review score and expert pre-review indicators of the expert pre-review score are obtained, the platform pre-review indicators, such as the relevance, completeness and similarity of the scientific research projects; the expert pre-review indicators, such as the beneficialness, feasibility and innovation of the scientific research projects.

[0138] In this embodiment, the scientific research project is pre-reviewed on the platform a corresponding number of times according to the number of review experts, and the corresponding number of platform pre-review scores are obtained to balance the number of platform pre-review scores and the number of expert pre-review scores, so that the number of pre-review score analyses corresponding to each pre-review indicator is consistent.

[0139] In this embodiment, the index score of the pre-examination index refers to the specific score of the expert pre-examination score of the corresponding review expert at the said pre-examination index. The expert pre-examination score is obtained by comprehensive processing of the index scores of each pre-examination index. For example, the expert pre-examination score c1 of the review expert b1 has an index score c2 at the pre-examination index a1 and an index score c3 at the pre-examination index a2.

[0140] In this embodiment, the indicator range of the preliminary review indicator refers to the allowable score range of the indicator score of the preliminary review indicator. For example, the indicator range of the preliminary review indicator a1 is c1-c5. When the indicator score exceeds the indicator range, it is determined that the indicator score of the corresponding review expert at the preliminary review indicator a1 is incorrect and will not be adopted.

[0141] In this embodiment, uniformly superimposing the remaining indicator scores means blurring the review range of the remaining indicator scores and determining the distribution of the remaining indicator scores within the indicator range. For example, the preliminary review indicator a1, the indicator range c1-c5, the remaining indicator score c2 is blurred in the review range to c2-c3, and the remaining indicator score number d1 is distributed in the indicator range c2-c3.

[0142] In this embodiment, the review range of the remaining indicator scores is blurred to facilitate accurate analysis of the indicator scores.

[0143] In this embodiment, the uniform value of each preliminary review indicator refers to the degree of concentrated distribution of the remaining indicator scores within the indicator range. The larger the uniform value, the higher the accuracy of the review expert's review of the preliminary review indicator. For example, the remaining indicator scores of the preliminary review indicator a1 are concentrated in the indicator range of c2-c3.

[0144] In this embodiment, the divergence value of each preliminary review indicator refers to the degree of discrete distribution of the remaining indicator scores within the indicator range. The larger the divergence value, the lower the accuracy of the review expert's review of the preliminary review indicator.

[0145] In this embodiment, according to the unified value of the preliminary review indicator and the corresponding divergence value, it is convenient to handle the randomness of the review of each review expert, reduce the review error, and ensure the accuracy of the review.

[0146] In this embodiment, the indicator review satisfaction refers to the satisfaction of the review experts with each review indicator, for example, completely satisfied, basically satisfied, generally satisfied, satisfied, and dissatisfied.

[0147] In this embodiment, the indicator weight refers to the weight of the impact of the evaluation indicator on the scientific research project. For example, for scientific research project a1, the weight of the indicator for judging the beneficial effect of the scientific research project is the highest; for scientific research project a2, the weight of the indicator for judging the feasibility is the highest, and the corresponding indicator weights are obtained.

[0148] In this embodiment, the expert review value of the review expert refers to the accuracy of the review expert's review of the scientific research project. For example, review expert b1 has reviewed 10 scientific research projects in the past and determined that 9 of them can be approved. In fact, 8 scientific research projects were approved and 9 of them were correctly determined. Then the expert review value of review expert b1 is 0.9.

[0149] In this embodiment, each pre-examination indicator is uniformly quantified, for example, each pre-examination indicator is uniformly quantized to a range of 0-1.

[0150] In this embodiment, when it is monitored that the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, it is determined that the various review indicators in the final pre-review indicator set are correctly considered when conducting project review of the scientific research project. For example, the preset parameters are 0.6, the review parameters of scientific research project a1 are 0.9, the review parameters of scientific research project a2 are 0.8, and the review parameters of scientific research project a3 are 0.5. It is then determined that the project reviews of scientific research projects a1 and a2 are accurate, and the project review accuracy of scientific research project a1 is higher than that of scientific research project a2. The project review of scientific research project a3 is inaccurate, and there are review indicator review errors.

[0151] The beneficial effect of the above technical solution is: by establishing a project review model and performing weighted fusion through the platform pre-review scores, expert pre-review scores and expert review values, the influence of the subjective review of review experts on the review of scientific research projects is reduced, and the review accuracy of the final review scores of the scientific research projects is effectively ensured.

[0152] The embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, which performs project management according to the basic data entry results of the scientific research project, including:

[0153] According to the basic input results of the scientific research project, the scientific research project is stored in the corresponding database of the scientific research project platform, and the final review score of the scientific research project is added to the scientific research name;

[0154] The scientific research project platform stores the preliminary scores of various preliminary review indicators used to review the scientific research projects, and performs data restoration on the review impact data of the scientific research projects that have completed data processing. At the same time, the scientific researchers are notified that the scientific research project review is completed.

[0155] In this embodiment, the corresponding database storage is performed for the determination of the approval of the scientific research project. For example, if the scientific research project a1 is determined to be approved, the scientific research project a1 will be stored in the corresponding database of the scientific research project platform; if the scientific research project a2 is determined not to be approved, the scientific research project a2 will be returned. If the scientific research project a2 is modified and determined to be approved, it will be stored in the corresponding database.

[0156] In this embodiment, researchers are notified when each stage of project review management is completed. For example, when the platform pre-examination is completed, researchers are notified of the platform pre-examination results, so that researchers can make timely and effective modifications or supplements to the research projects according to the notification content of each stage.

[0157] The beneficial effect of the above technical solution is: according to the basic input results of the scientific research projects, the scientific research projects are stored in the corresponding database of the scientific research project platform, which realizes the systematic management of the scientific research projects and improves the management efficiency of the scientific research projects.

[0158] The embodiment of the present invention provides a project review management method for a scientific research project platform, further comprising:

[0159] Set access rights for each researcher and review expert according to the scientific research project platform. When legitimate access to the scientific research project platform is detected, the corresponding platform functions are opened according to the access rights;

[0160] When it is detected that a scientific research project has been modified or supplemented, the corresponding platform function will be opened;

[0161] When there are multiple scientific research projects under review and management at the same time on the scientific research project platform, project review and management will be conducted from large to small based on the final review scores of each scientific research project.

[0162] In this embodiment, the access rights of each researcher and review expert are set according to the scientific research project platform. For example, when a scientific research project is reviewed, the scientific research project platform sets the researcher's access rights to the review results and the access rights to modify and supplement the scientific research project.

[0163] In this embodiment, if there is a project modification or project supplement in the scientific research project, the project review is re-executed to determine the final score of the modified or supplemented scientific research project. For example, for scientific research project a1, the final score b1 is output, and then there is a project modification after the final score b1 is output. The project review is re-executed and the final score b2 is output. The scientific research project platform manages the scientific research project a1 according to the final score b2.

[0164] The beneficial effects of the above technical solution are: setting access rights to ensure the security of scientific research projects; when it is monitored that there is project modification or project supplementation in the scientific research project, opening the corresponding platform function is conducive to ensuring the data integrity of the scientific research project; conducting project review and management from large to small according to the final review score of each scientific research project, thereby improving the efficiency of scientific research project management.

[0165] Finally, it should be noted that the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of the present invention, rather than to limit it. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the aforementioned embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that they can still modify the technical solutions described in the aforementioned embodiments, or make equivalent replacements for some of the technical features therein. However, these modifications or replacements do not deviate the essence of the corresponding technical solutions from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims

1. A project review management method for a scientific research project platform, characterized in that: include: Step 1: When a new scientific research project review application is added to the scientific research project platform, the basic data of the scientific research project is entered and the data to be reviewed is extracted; Step 2: Perform a platform pre-examination on the data to be reviewed. When the similarity between the data to be reviewed and the historical scientific research projects in the historical database is lower than the preset similarity, the platform pre-examination score of the scientific research project is determined based on the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed, including: Perform a platform pre-examination based on the auxiliary data to be reviewed. If it is determined that the scientific research project does not have the review qualifications, the platform pre-examination is considered unqualified and a platform pre-examination unqualified alarm is generated; Otherwise, historical research projects in the historical database are obtained based on the auxiliary data to be reviewed; Data extraction obtains historical review subject data of historical scientific research projects, calculates similarity between the subject data to be reviewed and each historical review subject data, and performs secondary platform pre-review. When the similarity is not lower than the preset similarity, a secondary platform pre-review failure alarm is generated; Otherwise, according to the preset scientific research project analysis strategy of the scientific research project platform, the relevance and completeness of the data to be reviewed are obtained, and the platform pre-review score of the scientific research project is determined in combination with the similarity; Step 3: Assign review experts according to scientific research projects and obtain expert pre-review scores. Establish a project review model and perform weighted fusion based on the platform pre-review scores, expert pre-review scores, and expert review values. When the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, output the final review score of the scientific research project, including: When a scientific research project is being reviewed, the data of the scientific researchers and the data of the assigned review experts of the scientific research project will be fuzzy processed; Perform data quantification processing based on the scientific research information of the scientific researcher, obtain the scientific research score of the scientific researcher for the scientific research project, and enter it into the scientific research project; Perform text data analysis on the data to be reviewed, and perform data fuzzification on the text data that is determined to be review-affecting data; Obtain relevant scientific research fields of the scientific research project according to the scientific research project platform and call the corresponding review expert database to build a review expert group for the scientific research project; When it is monitored that the review experts of the review expert group already have review tasks during the scientific research project review period, they will be deleted; Obtain the social relevance between the review experts and the scientific research project after the first deletion. If the review experts and the scientific research project have social relevance, perform a second deletion; Obtain the scientific research relevance between the review experts and the scientific research project after the second deletion, and delete the review experts whose scientific research relevance is lower than the preset relevance for a third time; Obtain the number of review experts who conduct project review for the scientific research project from the scientific research project platform, randomly select review experts of the number of review experts from the review expert group after three deletions, and construct the final review expert group for the scientific research project; Assign review experts according to the expert review process of scientific research projects and obtain expert pre-review scores; Obtain the platform pre-examination index of the platform pre-examination score and the expert pre-examination index of the expert pre-examination score, and construct a pre-examination index set; Conduct platform pre-examinations for the scientific research projects for a corresponding number of times according to the number of review experts, obtain platform pre-examination scores for a corresponding number of times, determine the index scores of each pre-examination index in the pre-examination index set in combination with the expert pre-examination scores, eliminate the index scores that exceed the index range and uniformly superimpose the remaining index scores to obtain the uniform value and divergence value of each pre-examination index; When the uniform value of the same pre-screening indicator is greater than the corresponding divergence value, the pre-screening indicator is determined to be credible; Otherwise, the pre-screening indicator is determined to be unreliable and is removed from the pre-screening indicator set; Obtain the evaluation experts' satisfaction with each pre-examination indicator in the pre-examination indicator set after the indicators are eliminated based on the scientific research project platform; When the indicator review satisfaction is not higher than the preset satisfaction, the pre-examination indicator set after the elimination of the indicator is subjected to secondary elimination of the pre-examination indicator to construct the final pre-examination indicator set of the scientific research project; When it is monitored that the scientific research project platform has pre-examination indicator weight settings during the scientific research project review period, the pre-examination indicator weight is obtained; Otherwise, obtain the historical indicator weights of historical scientific research projects in the historical database; Determine the expert review value of the review expert based on the review expert's historical review projects, and establish a project review model by combining the platform pre-review score and the expert pre-review score; Obtaining the indicator range of each pre-examination indicator in the final pre-examination indicator set, performing unified quantification processing on each pre-examination indicator, quantifying the platform pre-examination score and the expert pre-examination score into a quantification range, and obtaining the quantified value of each pre-examination score; Performing anomaly detection on the quantized value, and re-quantizing or deleting the quantized value when it is determined that the quantized value is abnormal; Calculate the review parameters of the review model according to the final pre-review indicator set, weighted indicator weights and quantified values; Among them, F represents the review parameter of the review model; xi1 represents the indicator review satisfaction of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; wi1 represents the weighted indicator weight of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; f(xi1) represents the final pre-review score of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; y(j1, i1) represents the quantitative value of the j1th pre-review score of the i1th pre-review indicator in the final pre-review indicator set; pj1 represents the expert review value of the pre-review expert corresponding to the j1th pre-review score; a1 represents the platform pre-review score; a2 represents the expert pre-review score; y(j1, i1)∈a1 represents the pre-review score belongs to the platform pre-review score; y(j1, i1)∈a2 represents the pre-review score belongs to the expert pre-review score; n1 represents the number of pre-review indicators in the final pre-review indicator set; m1 represents the number of review experts for scientific research projects; When it is monitored that the review parameters of the project review model are not lower than the preset parameters, the platform pre-review score and the expert pre-review score are weighted and integrated according to the review model to output the final review score of the scientific research project; Step 4: When the final review score of the scientific research project is not lower than the preset review score, the scientific research project is approved and project management is carried out according to the basic data entry results of the scientific research project.

2. According to claim 1, a project review and management method for a scientific research project platform is characterized in that: Enter basic data of scientific research projects and extract data to be reviewed, including: Entering the basic data of the scientific research project in the preset scientific research project review entry period according to the basic data module of the scientific research project platform, wherein the basic data module includes: scientific research name module, scientific research goal module, expected results module, scientific research personnel module and scientific research planning module; If there is a basic data module that has not been entered, an alarm will be issued for data entry in the corresponding basic data module, and basic data will be supplemented when the entry period is exceeded; The final input basic data of the scientific research project is extracted to obtain the data to be reviewed, wherein the data to be reviewed includes: main data to be reviewed and auxiliary data to be reviewed.

3. The project review management method of a scientific research project platform according to claim 1, characterized in that: Project management is carried out according to the results of basic data entry of scientific research projects, including: According to the basic input results of the scientific research project, the scientific research project is stored in the corresponding database of the scientific research project platform, and the final review score of the scientific research project is added to the scientific research name; The scientific research project platform stores the preliminary scores of various preliminary review indicators used to review the scientific research projects, and performs data restoration on the review impact data of the scientific research projects that have completed data processing. At the same time, the scientific researchers are notified that the scientific research project review is completed.

4. The project review management method of a scientific research project platform according to claim 1, characterized in that: Also includes: Set access rights for each researcher and review expert according to the scientific research project platform. When legitimate access to the scientific research project platform is detected, the corresponding platform functions are opened according to the access rights; When it is detected that a scientific research project has been modified or supplemented, the corresponding platform function will be opened; When there are multiple scientific research projects under review and management at the same time on the scientific research project platform, project review and management will be conducted from large to small based on the final review scores of each scientific research project.

Images