昨天收到RFE信--NSC0444挑剔contribution,望大家支招# Immigration - 落地生根
p*r
1 楼
工作保不住了，老板最后通牒，一月底走人。望大家群策群力，救小弟出坑。
我是DIY.大致说一下我的背景：生物医学基础研究，中英文20篇，大部分是中文老文水
文。总引用不到200，大部分中文引用，独立180左右。近两年发的文章质量可以但是没
引用。我用来claim贡献的引用总计估计也就60多个。别的属于三无人员。没列引用排
名等各种%比较，因为拿不出手。
在PL里，我是这么论述贡献的：列了三项贡献，逐项介绍（领域里存在的问题，我解决
了啥，影响了领域），工作被别人implemented（全是引用的例子）；三个贡献中各穿
插一个引用文章的独立推荐人来背书；被综述和书引用来证明被广泛讨论和赞扬；引用
推荐人的话证明工作意义重大。
上周直接PP的，几天后被RFE,昨天收到信，同意文章和审稿，质疑contribution。已经
联系了大蜜帮忙。在他老人家去北极看日出归来前（呵呵），先麻烦大伙给看看，想想
主意对付这个0444.感觉这个0444还是很高效仔细的，揪住了我的贡献不足使劲咬。
贴一下关于贡献的RFE信件内容如下：
The petitioner has submitted letters of recommendation and evidence of his
work being cited. This criterion has not been met because the evidence
submitted does not show that the beneficiary's contributions are considered
to be of major significance in the field of endeavor.
The letters serve to show that there are people in the field that think
highly of the petitioner's work, and that the work has assisted their own.
However, nothing in the letters is indicative of "major" significance.
（认为推荐信无法证明major significance,虽然获得了推荐人的高度赞扬并影响了其
工作。可我推荐信里说了工作的重大意义以及影响了多人，看来这个IO只认证据不认证
言，推荐信没用-如果没有证据支持----有扎实证据我还要RL作甚！）
The same is true for the citations. Though commendable, there is not ample
extensive use of the petitioner's work. In most papers in which he and his
team are cited, they are one of dozens being cited. They have used the
petitioner's work, along with dozens of other people's work.
认为我虽然举了一堆具体引用的例子，但引文同时使用了几十个别家的工作，所以我的
贡献不够major和extensive）
（接下来是模板...)
To assist in determining whether the beneficiary's contributions are
original (originality应该没被质疑吧，文章过了) and of major significance in
the field, the petitioner may submit:
--Objective documentary evidence of the significance of the beneficiary's
contribution to the field.
--Evidence that the beneficiary's major significant contribution(s) has
provoked widespread public commentary in the field or has been widely cited
（这个我是提交了工作被综述和书讨论的；在文章部分也给出了引用总数180和油灯图
的）.
--Evidence of the beneficiary's work being implemented by others. Possible
evidence may include but is not limited to:
(a) Contracts with companies using the beneficiary 's products ;
(b) Licensed technology being used by others ;
(c) Patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant to the
field.
我是DIY.大致说一下我的背景：生物医学基础研究，中英文20篇，大部分是中文老文水
文。总引用不到200，大部分中文引用，独立180左右。近两年发的文章质量可以但是没
引用。我用来claim贡献的引用总计估计也就60多个。别的属于三无人员。没列引用排
名等各种%比较，因为拿不出手。
在PL里，我是这么论述贡献的：列了三项贡献，逐项介绍（领域里存在的问题，我解决
了啥，影响了领域），工作被别人implemented（全是引用的例子）；三个贡献中各穿
插一个引用文章的独立推荐人来背书；被综述和书引用来证明被广泛讨论和赞扬；引用
推荐人的话证明工作意义重大。
上周直接PP的，几天后被RFE,昨天收到信，同意文章和审稿，质疑contribution。已经
联系了大蜜帮忙。在他老人家去北极看日出归来前（呵呵），先麻烦大伙给看看，想想
主意对付这个0444.感觉这个0444还是很高效仔细的，揪住了我的贡献不足使劲咬。
贴一下关于贡献的RFE信件内容如下：
The petitioner has submitted letters of recommendation and evidence of his
work being cited. This criterion has not been met because the evidence
submitted does not show that the beneficiary's contributions are considered
to be of major significance in the field of endeavor.
The letters serve to show that there are people in the field that think
highly of the petitioner's work, and that the work has assisted their own.
However, nothing in the letters is indicative of "major" significance.
（认为推荐信无法证明major significance,虽然获得了推荐人的高度赞扬并影响了其
工作。可我推荐信里说了工作的重大意义以及影响了多人，看来这个IO只认证据不认证
言，推荐信没用-如果没有证据支持----有扎实证据我还要RL作甚！）
The same is true for the citations. Though commendable, there is not ample
extensive use of the petitioner's work. In most papers in which he and his
team are cited, they are one of dozens being cited. They have used the
petitioner's work, along with dozens of other people's work.
认为我虽然举了一堆具体引用的例子，但引文同时使用了几十个别家的工作，所以我的
贡献不够major和extensive）
（接下来是模板...)
To assist in determining whether the beneficiary's contributions are
original (originality应该没被质疑吧，文章过了) and of major significance in
the field, the petitioner may submit:
--Objective documentary evidence of the significance of the beneficiary's
contribution to the field.
--Evidence that the beneficiary's major significant contribution(s) has
provoked widespread public commentary in the field or has been widely cited
（这个我是提交了工作被综述和书讨论的；在文章部分也给出了引用总数180和油灯图
的）.
--Evidence of the beneficiary's work being implemented by others. Possible
evidence may include but is not limited to:
(a) Contracts with companies using the beneficiary 's products ;
(b) Licensed technology being used by others ;
(c) Patents currently being utilized and shown to be significant to the
field.
