Help Review of the application Exceptional Talent endorsement

1

Hi everyone,
I am working Technical and R&D Lead for past 3 years. I have completed My Masters in advanced computer science from University of Liverpool in 2019. I am already on a skilled worker visa. Below are the details for my application.

  1. I have 3 solid references - One from my company CTO, one from CEO and One from colleague who is a Ph.D.
  2. I have one patent in use of AI in Novel wash decontamination.
  3. I have a paper on arXiv on use of deep learning for automated image segmentation.
  4. Deep learning specialisation and reinforcement learning certificates from coursera.
  5. Envato profile with a rating of 4.5 stars and 400+ sales.
  6. Peer feedbacks and payslips.
  7. Gitlab commit history showing the development history.

Thank you in advance for the help.

2

Hi @Manhar_Sharma it will help everyone to give fair feedback if you can structure your evidence ideas into a structured application outline specifying which criterias you are thinking of and what evidence under each criteria. Please refer to other posts in the forum for the structure.

2 Likes
3

Hi @pahuja. Thank you for the feedback. Here is my application structured as suggested.

LoR:

  1. CTO and Honorary Professor
  2. CEO of my company
  3. Colleague who is a Ph.d. and head of production.

MC:

  1. Patent in use of AI in Novel wash decontamination.
  2. A paper on arXiv on use of deep learning for automated image segmentation.
  3. Feedback and references from colleagues on my part as a leader.

OC1:

  1. Deep learning specialisation and reinforcement learning certificates from coursera.
  2. Envato profile with a rating of 4.5 stars and 400+ sales.
  3. Gitlab commit history showing the development history.

OC2:

  1. Peer feedbacks and payslips.
  2. Proof showing I am a director of a company.

Thank you in advance

4

Hi @Manhar_Sharma

Here’s a professionally rephrased version:

Feedback on Letters of Recommendation (LORs) and Evidence Submission

  • LORs: It would be beneficial to have the recommender highlight your technical expertise and provide specific examples of your accomplishments. Additionally, mentioning any notable projects or achievements would strengthen the recommendation. Is your third recommender a tech expert? What is the first recommender talking about?
  • Metrics and Statistics: Including statistics and metrics related to the paper and patent, such as citation counts or impact factor, can help demonstrate the significance of your work.
  • Paper Presentation/Publishing: If the paper was presented or published in a leading tech conference, please provide evidence of this, as it can significantly enhance the credibility of your submission.

Feedback on Evidence Submission

  • Feedback Collation: Instead of compiling multiple feedbacks, consider obtaining a single, strong reference letter that can provide a more in-depth discussion of your leadership role in the industry. This would be more effective in meeting the guidelines.
  • Certifications and Profile: While certifications and a strong online profile are beneficial, they do not suffice as evidence of innovation. To demonstrate contribution to innovation, it is essential to clearly articulate what makes your work innovative, your specific role in it, the impact it has had, and provide supporting evidence.
  • OC1 and OC2: Your submissions for OC1 (innovation) and OC2 (advancement of the field) require significant improvement. Peer feedbacks and directorship alone do not adequately demonstrate contribution to the advancement of the field. We recommend thoroughly reviewing the official guidelines to understand the requirements and examples of acceptable evidence for each criterion.

Recommendation

To strengthen your submission, we suggest revisiting the official guidelines and ensuring that your evidence aligns with the specified requirements. Providing more detailed and specific examples, as well as metrics and statistics to support your claims, will help to build a stronger case.

5

To strengthen your application for the Exceptional Talent endorsement, focus on aligning your evidence with the official guidelines. For your Letters of Recommendation, ensure that each recommender highlights your technical expertise and provides specific examples of your achievements. If possible, include metrics or notable projects to substantiate their claims. This approach has been effective in other successful applications I’ve seen.

For your evidence, emphasize the impact and innovation of your work. For example, provide citation counts or impact factors for your paper and patent to demonstrate their significance. If your paper was presented at a leading conference, include proof of this. Similarly, for your GitLab contributions and Envato profile, clearly articulate your role, the innovation involved, and the impact of your work. This level of detail is crucial to meet the criteria.

Lastly, review the requirements for OC1 and OC2 carefully. Peer feedback and directorship alone may not suffice. Instead, focus on demonstrating how your work has advanced the field or contributed to innovation. Use detailed examples and supporting evidence to make a compelling case. Drawing from past applications, this structured and evidence-backed approach significantly improves your chances of success.

For Talent, one of the requirements is also having sustained national or international recognition. Is that something you would be able to provide supporting evidences for?