a******n
发帖数: 166 | 1 看这两段：
USCIS officers must evaluate whether the original work constitutes major,
significant contributions to the field. Although funded and published work
may be “original,” this fact alone is not sufficient to establish that the
work is of major significance. For example, peer-reviewed presentations at
academic symposia or peer-reviewed articles in scholarly journals that have
provoked widespread commentary or received notice from others working in the
field, or entries (particularly a goodly number) in a citation index which
cite the alien's work as authoritative in the field, may be probative of the
significance of the alien’s contributions to the field of endeavor.
USCIS officers should take into account the probative analysis that experts
in the field may provide in opinion letters regarding the significance of
the alien’s contributions in order to assist in giving an assessment of the
alien’s original contributions of major significance. That said, not all
expert letters provide such analysis. Letters that specifically articulate
how the alien’s contributions are of major significance to the field and
its impact on subsequent work add value. Letters that lack specifics and
simply use hyperbolic language do not add value, and are not considered to
be probative evidence that may form the basis for meeting this criterion.
严格的说，综述引用数多的话，算得上significant impact，但不是真正的original
work，也就不能计入original contribution了。看来还是不要突出综述文章的类别为
好？ |
|
