Information for Scientific Reviewers
This text provides information for Scientific Reviewers about the Review process.
As has been sanctioned by the steering committee of the IT Center, the majority of the resources of the RWTH High Performance Computing are distributed following a project-based approach.
Users who need more than a certain amount of CPU time have to formally request it by submitting a project application. Besides a technical evaluation by the staff of the IT Center, applications for lots of compute resources are also subjected to scientific peer reviewing.
On the other hand, each principal investigator of a computing project is kindly requested to take part in reviewing other scientists' compute project proposals.
We try to match reviewers and applications according to the DFG topic(s) given in the applications. We are aware that we cannot always find a perfect match. So please try to do your best in reviewing the applications that we assigned to you. In the case that you would like to instead nominate a delegate, who is able to thoroughly take part in the reviewing process, please provide his or her Name and Email address to
Here we collect information and provide advice about the scientific reviewing process of computing project applications.
This PDF file describes the reviewing process once you have been entered into the JARDS system and an application has been assigned to you for reviewing.
Reviewers are advised be stricter and more thorough the higher the amount of requested resources is. In general, projects of category NHR-Normal (up to 8 Mio core-hrs) are considered to be of moderate size whereas projects of category JARA and NHR-Large are considered to be large or very large (8 Mio core-hrs and more).
Please do not hesitate to contact us should you encounter any problems or have further questions by sending an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
We would like to thank you for your cooperation.