s*******l
发帖数: 2093 | 1 背景比较弱
生物统计
Paper 17
citation 240
5封推荐信（3封独立）
RFE by XM1307，质疑contribution，不知道是不是模版rfe或者杀手。
大部分citation都来自酱油文章，也没有亮点，感觉目前的推荐信和PL已经把可以挖的
挖过了。
Citation does not establish that this is record is widespread enough to be
consistent with the citation of the work of an individual who made original
contribution of major significance to the field as whole.
The support letter do not establish the petitioner has made contributions of
major significance to the entire （还把entire给加亮了） field. The provided
evidence failed to establish that the petitioner’s work has been widely
implemented in her field of endeavor as a whole.
In sum, while the petitioner has submitted objective documentary evidence of
the petitioner’s original contributions to the field, this evidence does
not establish the petition’s work has already had a significant impact on
the field.
Submit:
1. Objective documentary evidence of the significance of the beneficiary
’s contribution to the field
这个能提供些什么呢？
2. Documentary evidence that people throughout the field currently
consider the beneficiary’s work important
感觉和1要的是同一个东西
3. Testimony or support letters from experts which discuss the
beneficiary’s contributions of major significance.
可以再试图找推荐信，但是也不知道还能不能挖出新的亮点了
4. Evidence that the beneficiary’s major significant contributions has
provoked widespread public commentary in the field of has been widely cited
这个是指媒体报道吗？
5. Evidence of the beneficiary’s work being implemented by others.
Possible evidence may include but is not limited to
a. Contract with companies using the beneficiary’s products
b. Licensed technology being used by others
c. Patents currently being utilized and shown to be Signiant to the field
没有应用和patent
Note: Letters and testimonies, if submitted, must provide as much details as
possible about the beneficiary’s contribution and must explain, in detail,
how the contribution was ‘original’ (not merely replicating the work of
others) and how they were of “major” significant. General statements
regarding the importance of the endeavors which are not supported by
documentary evidence are insufficient. |
c*********8
发帖数: 1327 | 2 可能你的PL组织的不好，肯定是罗列了citation而已
我背景不如你的十分之一，只有一论文28引用
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/Immigration/33947647.html
其实下边这五六点随便挑一点配合强有力独立推荐信可解，必须要找一两个有impact的
应用例子
original
【在 s*******l 的大作中提到】
: 背景比较弱
: 生物统计
: Paper 17
: citation 240
: 5封推荐信（3封独立）
: RFE by XM1307，质疑contribution，不知道是不是模版rfe或者杀手。
: 大部分citation都来自酱油文章，也没有亮点，感觉目前的推荐信和PL已经把可以挖的
: 挖过了。
: Citation does not establish that this is record is widespread enough to be
: consistent with the citation of the work of an individual who made original
|
D*****1
发帖数: 5 | |
s**********7
发帖数: 6 | 4 放心吧，你的背景这么强，好好回复肯定过的。
不知你是否是用律师，自己没太操心? 我当时用了某版红律师，走套路，等来RFE. 后
来自己又挖掘了一些亮点，比如和essential science indicator比较，强加进去(律师
不给我加)，后来就过了。 |
c*********r
发帖数: 118 | |
h***a
发帖数: 1775 | |
y*********6
发帖数: 3 | 7 跟我的RFE信很像，TSC最近突出强调具体应用，我PL里面1000citation和若干top1%论
文他们也不满意。
我理解这一整封信只有一句话，就是“The provided evidence failed to establish
that the petitioner’s work has been widely implemented in her field of
endeavor as a whole.”
我补充了两个公司implement我的方法，其中一个是专利 + 转让合同 + 推荐信, 另一
个只有公司CEO的推荐信。RRFE通过了。 |
s*******l
发帖数: 2093 | 8 谢谢大家分享。现在申请的是1a，感觉可以挖掘的引用都挖过了。用的律师的模版，
notable citation时没有具体highlight文章里是如何引用的，只是简单总结了下，不
知道这个如何改进。其他该挖的亮点都挖过了，如果加推荐信也只能讨论之前亮点里，
不知有没有意义。
最近单位刚刚同意办1b，考虑要不要直接withdraw了投1b。要不就是rrfe 1a和提交1b
同时弄。这一路折腾下来真是身心俱疲。
original
【在 s*******l 的大作中提到】
: 背景比较弱
: 生物统计
: Paper 17
: citation 240
: 5封推荐信（3封独立）
: RFE by XM1307，质疑contribution，不知道是不是模版rfe或者杀手。
: 大部分citation都来自酱油文章，也没有亮点，感觉目前的推荐信和PL已经把可以挖的
: 挖过了。
: Citation does not establish that this is record is widespread enough to be
: consistent with the citation of the work of an individual who made original
|
s*******l
发帖数: 2093 | 9 这样实在的亮点我确实没有，所以实在扯不上去
establish
【在 y*********6 的大作中提到】
: 跟我的RFE信很像，TSC最近突出强调具体应用，我PL里面1000citation和若干top1%论
: 文他们也不满意。
: 我理解这一整封信只有一句话，就是“The provided evidence failed to establish
: that the petitioner’s work has been widely implemented in her field of
: endeavor as a whole.”
: 我补充了两个公司implement我的方法，其中一个是专利 + 转让合同 + 推荐信, 另一
: 个只有公司CEO的推荐信。RRFE通过了。
|
s*******l
发帖数: 2093 | 10 开始写research summary是花了很多功夫的，把引用我的文章一篇篇看过去。后来推荐
信和pl就基本靠律师了。但是让我自己弄感觉要大改，也没有那么多精力和信心。现在
很想放弃了重新弄1b
【在 s**********7 的大作中提到】
: 放心吧，你的背景这么强，好好回复肯定过的。
: 不知你是否是用律师，自己没太操心? 我当时用了某版红律师，走套路，等来RFE. 后
: 来自己又挖掘了一些亮点，比如和essential science indicator比较，强加进去(律师
: 不给我加)，后来就过了。
|
