Resubmission - reading the summary statement
Lesson 4 of 6 · Grants, talks and posters
1 · Learn the move · Cognitive verifier
A summary statement is three reviewers' worth of overlapping, unevenly weighted critique compressed into a document you will first read too fast. The verifier decomposes it before you respond to any of it: split the text into individual critiques, one per row; dedupe across reviewers, because three phrasings of the same doubt are one issue with three votes and deserve triple weight, not triple responses; classify each - addressable by experiment, addressable by writing, or fundamental to the approach; then map every row to a plan line. The one-page introduction to the resubmission answers the deduped list in weight order, not each sting in the order it landed. What the model does not do is score your odds - it structures the critique; the read on whether the fundamentals are survivable belongs to you and your program officer.
Decompose this summary statement: [paste]. Steps: (1) split into individual critiques, one row each, tagged by reviewer, (2) dedupe - group rows that are the same doubt in different words, weight by how many reviewers raised it, (3) classify each group: EXPERIMENT / WRITING / FUNDAMENTAL, (4) map each to a response plan line with cost. Do not score my chances and do not draft the introduction yet - structure first.
2 · Your turn. You write the prompt
The summary statement arrived: not discussed last round's fear, but scored this time, with critiques from three reviewers that partially overlap and partially contradict - one wants more preliminary data, one says the preliminary data distracts from the aims, and the enthusiasm-killer sentence appears once, in the middle, easy to miss on an angry first read.
Remember: the AI sees only your prompt, not this page. If the situation isn't in your prompt, it doesn't exist.
Optional. These shape the output when you run your prompt below, not your score.