I have applied for endorsement. I graduated in 2023 with a BS in CS. After BS I was admitted to a fully funded PhD in AI at King’s College London, I left PhD in 2024 after one year, and started working for a US based AI firm as Chief Technology Officer where I was working as an AI consultant alongside PhD.
My evidence map — Global Talent / Tech Nation (Digital Technology, Exceptional Promise)
Criteria chosen: Mandatory + Optional Criterion 1 (Innovation) + Optional Criterion 3 (Significant Contributions). You need the Mandatory criterion plus any 2 of the 4 optional ones, with ≥2 pieces of evidence each.
Mandatory — potential to be a leading talent
- Ethics Reviewer role at a top-tier AI/ML conference NeurIPS (multiple years).
- Competitive doctoral research bursary in an AI field at Kings.
- Speaking at tech events.
- Recognition / role at an AI research centre.
- Research accepted and presented at an international conference (Stanford).
Optional Criterion 1 — Innovation
6–7. Two granted patents (with international PCT protection) in AI-driven technology.
Optional Criterion 3 — Significant contributions
8. A paying customer’s letter plus the invoice, combined with code-commit evidence proving I personally built the product.
9. Production architecture, live product-scale metrics, and self-hosted infrastructure, with a publicly verifiable live endpoint.
Always-required supporting documents (don’t count toward the evidence pieces):
- CV
- Personal statement
- 3 recommendation letters from senior digital-technology experts (industry + academic)
- Business evidence for my company (official registry record + incorporation documents)
What do you asses, are my chances towards endorsement? I wanna move and grow my fintech product in UK.
1 Like
The NeurIPS ethics reviewer role is your strongest MC piece. Multiple years of reviewing for a top-tier AI/ML conference is exactly the kind of external recognition assessors want to see, and it’s verifiable. The Stanford conference presentation is solid if it was peer-reviewed and you have the acceptance documentation. The King’s bursary is weaker because the Official Guide says “awards must be of merit and not solely monetary (e.g. grants, bursaries or scholarships).” Unless there was a competitive selection component beyond funding, it risks being dismissed.
For OC1, granted patents with PCT protection are strong evidence of innovation. Make sure the patent documents clearly show your name as inventor and include the Google Patents verification link the guide mentions.
OC3 is where you need to be careful. Code commits and architecture diagrams are self-documentation. The paying customer letter and invoice are good third-party evidence, but combining them with screenshots of your own code in the same evidence piece dilutes the third-party component. Lead with externally verifiable commercial impact: the invoice, the customer letter, any usage metrics that don’t come from your own systems. Production metrics from infrastructure you control are just you attesting to your own work.
Trim MC to your 2 strongest pieces (NeurIPS reviewer + Stanford presentation), and restructure OC3 to foreground the third-party evidence.
@Osama_Mustafa
Have you applied already?
Akash, thank you for your feedback. I will keep this in the spotlight during my next attempt:
- Yes, Stanford One was a conference where I submitted an abstract of a research project i led at a research center and was accepted. I as a speaker was invited, and I have attached the invitation email from stanford (but I think I have not packaged it quite well, as I am explaining to you).
- The King’s one, I have attached multiple evidences, the bursary was only awarded to one top candidate in the interviews, which is evident in the email from the director, which I attached, I have also attached evidence that Professor funded me from her Wellcome award.
- OC3 is yes I think where I couldn’t do much since much of my effort uptil now has been consumed in system development which I have tried showing the scale of the system. Millions of data artifacts, but you are right external recognition is limited, I have shown one customer letter who is an R&D manager of a fintech company in Dubai.
Yes Raphael. But I am preparing for next attempt based on this feedback.
I also have two peer reviewed conference papers, and two preprints on arxiv, which are in my CV but I had to exclude them from evidence pack due to space limitations.
@Osama_Mustafa I believe, you have some good evidence, even though there are some gaps. Since you plan to apply once the outcome is out, it’s best to wait and stay hopeful.
All the best.