Russian science will buy brains. Expensive.
Russian universities will spend 6 billion rubles on "brain import"Evgeny Nasyrov, Alexey Timoshenko, GZT.RU
Forty of the world's leading scientists received 150 million rubles from the Ministry of Education and Science for the creation of laboratories in Russian universities. GZT.RU found out the details of applications for research, the total funding of which will amount to 6 billion rubles.
The megagrant competition was immediately called unique for Russian science. After all, the amount of grants turned out to be attractive not only for domestic scientists, but also for the best specialists in the world. Until recently, the scientific elite did not believe that grants would be distributed with the participation of foreign experts. However, it seems that the Ministry of Education has decided to make a kind of front showcase out of this competition. Even famous scientists who did not pass the selection, in an interview with GZT.RU noted that the selection of projects was fair and honest. You can find detailed information about the winners of the competition, their projects and the universities where they will work on the interactive diagram:
What will the money be used for
40 scientists will receive up to 150 million rubles for three years. A very impressive amount, even by American standards. According to the terms of the competition, each winner must create a top-level laboratory at the selected university and spend at least 4 months a year in it. Moreover, after the expiration of the contract, the laboratory should continue to work, and not curtail with the departure of the leader to his home university. The only issue that was not disclosed was the role of the grants council, which eventually decided on the allocation of money.
What can you buy or do with this money in science? A good microscope, for example, costs from 50 thousand dollars, if we are talking about "ordinary" optics. The amount increases to a million. if we talk about complex laser systems for studying living cells. Antibodies for biochemical research can cost several hundred dollars, and custom–synthesized RNA molecules are even more expensive; for productive work, several tens of thousands of dollars for reagents are not even a luxury, but a necessity. A million dollars is worth a tomograph, which also requires liquid helium to work – about ten dollars per liter.
If we talk about the world salaries of postdocs (in Russian terminology, this is a candidate of sciences, working after the defense, a researcher with a degree, but not yet grown up to the professorial rate), then the amount from 30 to 70 thousand dollars per year is considered a normal level (depends on the country, field of knowledge and requirements). It is impossible to say how much it is planned to pay performers of works in Russia, but it can be calculated that a million will be enough for a year to pay for the work of several dozen people.
What problems can the winners face? Among these are bureaucratic restrictions on working with certain substances – even banal potassium permanganate, sulfuric acid and acetone were included in the list of "precursors" by the efforts of the State Drug Control. For those grants that were issued earlier, it was also required to provide lists of what is planned to be purchased in advance – which is often practically unrealistic.
"Naturally, mathematicians do not need experimental equipment (except computers and books). On the other hand, compared to an experimental laboratory, an active mathematical department or laboratory has more professors, visitors, seminars, which also requires funding. So mathematicians need almost comparable amounts, and in such contests they usually apply for a slightly smaller amount. As far as I know, all the mathematicians who received this grant asked for about $3 million. The same ratio was with similar grants of the European Scientific Council, introduced 2 years ago," he said GZT.RU the winner of the competition is mathematician Stanislav Smirnov.
Reaction of participants
Stanislav Smirnov, mathematician, professor at the University of Geneva, winner of the Fields Prize.
The winner of the contest.
Together with colleagues from St. Petersburg (St. Petersburg State University), we proposed a project at the intersection of several active areas of modern mathematics: complex analysis, probability theory, mathematical physics. These areas are well represented in St. Petersburg, but we plan to start several new areas of research. It is equally important for us to increase the number of seminars and courses for undergraduates and postgraduates, invite foreign specialists, and activate scientific life. According to the terms of the competition, an interdisciplinary laboratory "Probabilistic methods in mathematical analysis and mathematical physics" will be created. My group will include colleagues from departments close to the subject, especially mathematical analysis and probability theory. We also plan to invite new researchers, especially young ones. We hope there will also be foreign researchers – for example, two French graduate students will come for the spring semester.
Artem Oganov, chemist, professor at the State University of New York.
Contest participant
Biology, physics, medical technology are among the most advanced and practical important disciplines and the priority given to them is justified. The competition was fair, and the decision to select only 40 applications was logical, since the competition was announced in the summer and in a hurry, and this is not done. Of the 3-4 names that are familiar to me in this list, all are great scientists. However, there are great scientists among those who applied for a grant, but did not receive it. Let's not forget that in general, the level of applications was first-class. I will participate in the second round, of course, I expect to win. I think I could do a lot for Russian science.
Igor Efimov, Professor of Biomedical Engineering, Cell Biology and Physiology
at the University of Washington, USA. Participant of the contest.
There are several first-class mathematicians on the list of winners. This is very important, because mathematics in Russia is traditionally very strong, but many have left. Now such luminaries as Bogomolov and Smirnov will return, at least partially. Physics is also very strong in Russia – but it has also lost many. Now at least someone will return, and they have a place to work, since the laboratories in Russia have been preserved. Biology is more difficult. Russia has lost almost everything. I am currently working on a project in Nizhny Novgorod. Physiological laboratories have to be created almost from scratch. But Russia really needs them because of the catastrophic situation with health and the medical industry.
There are as many strong scientists among those who have not received grants as among those who have received them. Being in the company of Konstantin Severinov and Roald Sagdeev, who did not receive the grant, is as honorable as being in the company of Vladimir Zakharov and Fyodor Bogomolov, who received it. There are little-known and weak scientists among the winners. But this is a competition for projects, and not only for previous scientific achievements, so it is quite possible that weak scientists in the past wrote strong projects. In addition, regional considerations were probably taken into account – large grants are, first of all, assistance to many universities, so we had to smear a relatively small amount of butter on a large number of plates. The main merit of this program is that the normal competitive process of selecting applications has begun. As far as I know, the scientific expert evaluation was conducted by a German firm that selected world-class experts from around the world. Corruption was virtually eliminated at this stage. There are comments on the time frame of the review – some experts had to do it literally in 1-2 days. But the fact that only 40 grants were issued is a positive fact. This means that the commission listened to the recommendations of many scientists, including the Memorandum of the June conference in St. Petersburg, among the authors of which I am. We recommended not chasing numbers and not necessarily giving all 80 grants if, according to the commission, there will be fewer good applications. They did so.
Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru15.11.2010