科研经费竞争中，卓越与创新产出正脱钩。
When Excellence Stops Producing Knowledge: A Practitioner's Observation on Research Funding
- 以可展示性替代实际创新，评价标准扭曲研究方向。
- 专业写标书顾问兴起，AI辅助申请普及，评审人力不足。
- 适合反思科研评价体系的实践者和政策制定者阅读。
在近四十年参与科研经费竞争（申请、协调、评审、专家组成员）后，我观察到一个结构性悖论：尽管许多参与者意识到当前系统已接近功能极限，但多数改革措施反而加剧了深层矛盾。本文指出，卓越正因评价体系对可展示性的过度依赖，逐渐脱离知识生产。这一现象在竞争性基础研究资助及大型欧盟联合项目中尤为明显。三项加速趋势被分析：提案撰写专业化催生专门顾问；人工智能辅助申请兴起；评审人短缺迫使评审小组依赖远离实际研究领域的外部审稿人。这些观察并非外部批判，而是作为亲历者的内部记录，旨在揭示一种普遍经历却少被言说的模式，以期推动更建设性的方向调整。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
After almost four decades of participating in competitive research funding -- as applicant, coordinator, evaluator, and panel member -- I have come to see a structural paradox: many participants recognize that the current system is approaching its functional limits, yet most reform measures intensify rather than alleviate the underlying dynamics. This paper documents how excellence has become decoupled from knowledge production through an increasing coupling to representability under evaluation. The discussion focuses on two domains in which this is particularly visible: competitive basic research funding and large EU consortium projects. Three accelerating trends are examined: the professionalization of proposal writing through specialized consultants, the rise of AI-assisted applications, and an evaluator shortage that forces panels to rely on reviewers increasingly distant from the actual research domains. These observations are offered not as external critique but as an insider account, in the hope that naming a widely experienced but rarely articulated pattern may enable more constructive orientation. Keywords: Research funding, Excellence, Evaluation, Goodhart's Law, Professionalization, AI-assisted proposals, Peer review crisis
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。