The "descriptive scale" used by study section participants has been revised. The previous scale is too narrow for today's competition. The new scale indicated below will be used in all further grant reviews. (Note: the score the applicant receives is the average of all members of the study section, multiplied by 100).
| New Scale |
| 100 Absolutely amazing |
| 110 Incredible |
| 120 Impressive |
| 130 Wow |
| 140 Super duper |
| 150 Goodness gracious, great balls of fire |
| 160 Damn good |
| 170 Pretty darn good |
| 180 Reasonably good |
| 190 Some parts are really good |
| 200 Just OK |
| 210 Squishy |
| 220 Spotty |
| 230 Marginal |
| 240 Not even close |
| 250 Nothing special |
| 260 Not so good |
| 270 Slightly flawed |
| 280 Somewhat flawed |
| 290 Really somewhat flawed |
| 300 Experimentally and conceptually flawed |
| 320 Even the flaws are flawed |
| 340 Terrible |
| 360 Awful |
| 380 Jeepers |
| 400 Horrendous |
| 420 Even worse than horrendous |
| 440 Impossible to read without falling asleep |
| 460 Logically impaired |
| 480 Hard to do much worse |
| 500 If the proposal works, it will win the next Nobel prize |