Comment from Rachel Pries
Rachel PriesOpposeAcademic
Summary: A mathematics professor is opposing the proposed revisions to sections 200.205 and 200.340. They argue that the changes would undermine the integrity of the peer review process and could lead to the funding of superficial research rather than high-quality, long-term mathematical projects.
[200.205, 200.340]
To Whom it May Concern:
I am a professor in mathematics.
I am writing in my personal capacity to oppose the proposed revisions to sections 200.205 and 200.340 that would undermine the integrity of federal grant review processes and federal science agencies' ability to identify and fund impactful research.
It takes deep thinking and time to produce good mathematics. Peer review is the only way to evaluate quality and depth of proposals.
Mathematicians need stable environments to finish long term projects.
I'm concerned that this rule will lead to superficial math with limited impact.