ANSTO's research capabilities, led by the OPAL nuclear research reactor and associated instruments provide access to users investigating areas as diverse as materials, life sciences, climate change and mining/engineering.
Peer- review process
Scientific review
External referees will assess the proposals on-line concerning:
- quality of science (science interesting, relevance to the field)
- quality of track record (publications, involvement of students, projects)
- quality of planned experiment (use of technique adequate, efficient use of samples and sample environment).
Referees are asked to ranking the proposals on their scientific merit and give recommendations on beam-time allocation.
Technical and safety review
Internally, the proposals will be reviewed concerning:
- instrumental feasibility
- if the technique is adequate
- special hazards concerning sample, incl. irradiation in beam, and sample environment
- any special safety procedures required
Beam-time allocation
The Programme Advisory Committee (PAC) will receive all the referees comments to use in their discussion about the proposals. They will examine not only scientific merits (comments provided by external referees on-line), but also technical and safety aspects of a beam-time request.
The PAC ranks the proposals and recommends to the head of the Bragg Institute which proposals to accept and how much beam time to grant. Although assessment should be driven by the scientific merit of the proposal the development of new users and new research areas will also be taken into account.