What do I say about SoA and beyond?

State of the Art (SoA) is the current status of knowledge. It is crucial that you show that you know SoA. BECAUSE THIS IS THE PLATFORM YOUR PROPOSAL SHALL GO BEYOND.

By describing SoA you create the platform for your own research. When you have established the platform (this is what we know today) it is much easier to explain your own project. You are going to explain how you will go beyond SoA (no more, no less). You must build something on top of the SoA platform.

Space is limited. Be specific with the SoA you describe. It should relate directly to your own research and the project objectives.

In describing SoA you must show that you know:

Current projects and work in the field (for EC check with the Cordis base)
Literature; any relevant info of direct significance (references, references)
Methods; all major and relevant methods used in your field
Technology; any available and relevant
Alternatives; if there are alternative that solves your problem by other approaches do not try to hide this. Say that you know this.
Critics: If your approach is controversial show that you know the critic. Do not hide it.
Groups and centres: Show that you know all groups and centres working in your specific field. You are seldom alone if you do something important
Current practice. How is it done today? Any alternatives and practice known.
Negative results. Show that you also know negative results in your field.
Standard. If there are import standard mention them.
Legal aspects and directives (EC base!)

When you have established SoA you are ready to go beyond. You can take all the points from the list and use for showing how you will go beyond (not literally or mechanically, find your form for writing the text.) But:

Projects: Our project has not been done, it is different from all current projects, it builds on work in these projects…..
Literature: We build on current literature/knowledge and will produce results that may confirm, strengthen, change, contradict, open new views….
Methods: It may be a great plus if you can introduce new and innovative methods. Or used established data/methods in a new ways. Known methods to new problems may also be ok.
Technology: How your technology is new and may lead to innovation
Alternatives: Explain why you have chosen to solve the problem your way and why it is the best alternative or a very promising way of doing it.
Critics: Respond to critics and explain how you will tackle the problem. (Critic is not valid for your approach, it still worth trying, we will do something that avoids the critic…)
Groups and Centres: How you differ or you will make use of their competence…
Current practice: How you will improve…
Negative results: Same as critic. Why you will do it better and not get negative results.
Standards: If you contribute to new or improve standards it can be a great advantage.
Legal aspects and directives: How you will relate.

BE VERY CAREFUL IN CRITICISING OR MAKING NEGATIVE COMMENT ABOUT OTHER APPROACHES, METHODS, ALTERNATIVES AND CRITICS. If you do you must explain why and have a real good documentation. Evaluators do not like negative comments about others. We see this in their evaluation reports.

It may be a good idea to summarise current knowledge, SoA, in a table and show your approach and where you will go beyond SoA. In this way you can show where you will contribute and where you will use current knowledge. Not all need to be new and beyond.

How high above SoA?

It depends on:

Impact
Accuracy/precision to the point/make a difference in the field (even small)
Scientific field
Etc

In your writing you must be 100% clear that your research is a major step beyond SoA. If you do not believe in it nobody else will.

Home Previous Next