The annual announcement uniformly explains the application, recommendation, nomination, materials and acceptance arrangements.
The annual announcement uniformly publishes the open awards, applicable achievement period, qualification scope, material catalog, submission method and work date. Any nomination needs to explain why the candidate is suitable for the corresponding honour, and support the judgment with verifiable results and process materials.
Member nomination emphasizes continuous professional understanding, and institutional recommendation assumes the responsibility for fact confirmation. Team or project-type results are submitted by clear responsible entities for collaboration, achievement attribution, and public authorization. Paths not specified in the annual announcement will not be used as the basis for current acceptance.
Proposed by current members based on continuing professional understanding, describing the candidate's representative practice, actual contribution and award suitability.
Responsibility: Professional observation and recommendation reasonsOrganizations directly related to the results will confirm the formation time, implementation scope, candidate subject roles and disclosable content.
Responsibilities: Fact checking and institutional validationIt is suitable for team or project-type achievements, focusing on joint work, division of roles, achievement ownership and subsequent maintenance responsibilities.
Responsibility: collaborative relationship and complete rightsThe materials should be clear, verifiable, and directly related to the award. The annual announcement can adjust the format of the document based on the type of award and achievement, but the following six groups of content remain stable.
The authorized name of the candidate individual, team, organization or project, the award and professional direction to be nominated.
Recommendation relationships, observation bases, adaptation reasons, and core contributions that need to be evaluated.
Title, type, formation time, implementation scenarios, participating objects and actual roles of the results.
Works, reports, performance records, project documents, public pages, professional feedback or other supporting evidence.
The scope and duration of authorization of signatures, pictures, videos, music, text, data and participants.
Description of relationships with recommenders, reviewers, collaborating institutions, and interests in the results.
Formal review checks objects, categories, materials and rights status. When supplements or adjustments are needed, the notice should specify the specific content, completion deadline and processing method; the professional value will be independently judged by the subsequent evaluation process.
Each acceptance conclusion should record the verification scope, processing basis and necessary correction requirements, and maintain a clear connection with subsequent review materials. Entering into evaluation, limited item supplement, category suggestion or rejection only reflects the status of the process and does not constitute an early evaluation of the professional level of the results or the final award result.
