From: D. Kazakov (kazakov@cs.york.ac.uk)
Date: Wed 05 Mar 2003 - 19:34:53 GMT
Dear ALAMAS partners,
here is a suggestion about our next actions with respect to the FP6
CfP, based on the discussion and everyone's comments made in
Barcelona. I apologise for the apparent inactivity - apart from
dealing with the AAMAS-3 submissions, we have made further enquiries
about the current state of the seemingly changing rules of the game,
and received important and somewhat unexpected comments. The most
important of these concerns the role of an FP6 NoE: the number of
expected partners seems to have been reduced, and the focus is now on
integration rather than research achievements as such.
After detailed discussion with the University of York European Liaison
Officer we could not eliminate any of the types of project one could
apply for. We agreed that there is a clear potential to prepare a
potentially strong STREP in any of the areas discussed in Barcelona,
namely, Transport/Traffic, Interactive Entertainment (Games),
Financial Market Tools, etc. I should thank here everyone who has
started distributing information to the mailing list or outlining a
STREP proposal (Eduardo Alonso, Piotr Lipinski, Jean-Pierre
George...). At the same time, the expected overlap and potential
synergy between these STREP proposals show potential for a successful
IP. The two options would not be mutually exclusive, but the advantage
of an IP is its longer duration (4-5 years as opposed to a 2-3 year
STREP), which in our case would allow us to advance considerably more
the technology before we go for the specific, measurable deliverables
that either project should yield at the end.
Further, the ALAMAS EoI could relatively easily be presented as an
application for a co-ordination action (CA, the former thematic
network). With the constantly growing number of research groups
contacting us every week -- some of which have a strong research
record on adaptive and learning agents -- the case for a large network
supporting discussion, dissemination and short exchanges looks
stronger by the day.
Finally, one could consider a focussed NoE which necessarily includes
a smaller group of partners willing to co-operate to the extent as to
be willing to change some of their research priorities in order to
achieve better integration (and have vice-chancellors/rectors or
whatever else name the head of the institution might have who are
willing to sign a contract with clauses such as -- pay back up to 2
years' worth of EU funding if the goals are not met...).
It is also possible to combine some of these proposals and we should
consider these, e.g., to submit a number of STREP proposals
accompanied/followed by a proposal for a CA that ties them up together.
Here is what I am prepared to do next (with the help of Daniel and
Eduardo, as well as everyone else who already volunteered to send
input or wants to do so now):
(by 12 March): prepare a very condensed outline of each of the
possible *types* of proposal, and with the help of our EU liaison
officer, give them a rough evaluation using the Commission marking
scheme, and select the most promising type(s) of proposal. Please send
me the outlines of any STREP you have got so far in order to
incorporate its goals as WPs (work-packages) of a possible IP.
(by 15 March): Contact the appropriate EU strategic objective officers
about
- whether they find the topic of our proposal relevant to their
strategic objective (approach recommended by the Commission)
- which type of proposal would better fit their expectations (in
case we are still hesitating between various options).
At around this stage I expect to have a favourite large-size proposal
(IP, NoE, CA) to which everyone concerned would start to contribute.
(by 30 March): Meet with the EU officers who have sent an encouraging
reply. This opportunity could also be used to meet with some of the
partners, as we can arrange to book a meeting room in Brussels (e.g.,
a further discussion with Robonetics about their role and expectations
would be very helpful).
(10-11 April): Face-to-face discussion of the proposals at the AAMAS-3
symposium.
Aim: submit one or more proposals by:
- 24 April (if the IST-transport and/or FET pro-active call is
targeted) and/or
- mid-May (the next cut-off line for the open call submissions).
I would be thankful for any comments on this or contributions to the
documents being prepared.
Best greetings,
Dimitar Kazakov
--
Dr Dimitar Kazakov
Lecturer in Machine Learning
AIG, Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Heslington, York
YO10 5DD, UK
tel. +44 (0)1904 43 4775
fax: +44 (0)1904 43 2767
http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/~kazakov/