Autonomous Evaluation Indicator Selection for Fair R&D Project Distribution
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional methods for selecting research and development projects rely heavily on subjective expert evaluation and focus on individual technical indicators, lacking analysis of mutual relationships and leading to unfair distribution of projects among bidders, with limited opportunities for those not meeting specific quantitative criteria.
Innovation Solution
A system and method allowing research and development project bidders to autonomously propose evaluation indicators, which are grouped and used to compute performance scores, ensuring fair competition and transparent selection by classifying bidders into groups based on shared evaluation criteria, including papers, patents, employment, and research expenses.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If conventional objective indicators are used for technology evaluation, then technology evaluation can be performed objectively, but indicators are only used individually and mutual relationships between indicators are not analyzed
Solution Approach 1:
The patent combines multiple individual evaluation indicators into integrated evaluation models that analyze mutual relationships between indicators. The system merges separate indicator assessments into comprehensive evaluation frameworks that consider interactions and dependencies among different indicators, thereby preserving information about their mutual relationships while maintaining objective evaluation.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent creates composite evaluation models that integrate multiple indicators into unified assessment structures. These composite models combine various evaluation criteria (technical feasibility, market potential, risk factors, etc.) into integrated frameworks that capture the complex interrelationships between different evaluation dimensions, rather than treating indicators as isolated elements.
2Measurement precision
If performance evaluation items are limited to specific quantitative indicators, then evaluation criteria are clear and objective, but research and development projects are not distributed proportionately and schools submitting no paper are unlikely to be selected
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamic evaluation criteria that can be adjusted based on bidder characteristics and project requirements. The system allows evaluation indicators and their weights to be modified according to different institutional types, research fields, and project priorities, enabling fairer distribution opportunities for diverse bidders while maintaining clear objective assessment standards.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies different evaluation criteria and indicator sets tailored to specific bidder categories and project types. Rather than using uniform evaluation standards for all participants, the system customizes evaluation parameters to match local characteristics of different institutions and project requirements, thereby improving fairness and inclusivity while preserving evaluation rigor.
3Productivity
If one paper is used to bid for different projects, then bidders can maximize their evaluation scores, but this creates unfair competition and unequal distribution of projects
Solution Approach 1:
The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms that track and monitor the use of evaluation indicators across multiple bids. The system provides feedback to bidders about their evaluation scores and the utilization of their performance records, enabling transparent assessment of whether repeated use of the same papers creates unfair advantages and allowing for corrective adjustments in project allocation.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements preliminary measures to prevent unfair competition before it occurs. The system establishes rules and constraints that limit or regulate the repeated use of the same evaluation materials across different bids, and sets up preliminary screening mechanisms to identify and address potential fairness issues before project selection is finalized.
Data Source
AI summary
The present invention relates to a system and a method for selecting a research and development project through autonomous proposals of evaluation indicators, in which performance information generated according to a selection of performance evaluation items for research and development project bidding is classified by bidders, and the research and development project is selected for each classified bidder group. The present invention allows research and development project bidders to select evaluation indicators which serve as criteria for selecting a research and development project, thereby being capable of guaranteeing autonomy and providing fair bidding opportunities to all research and development project bidders. Also, since a research and development project is selected for each group classified according to the autonomously selected performance evaluation items, transparent selection and fair competition between the research and development project bidders can be ensured, and research and development projects can be equally divided.