These three two-page (approximately) texts are concept notes for a prospective collaboration with Stephanie Pierce’s comparative and evolutionary biomechanics group, not a submitted NSF proposal and not a claim of access to Pierce-lab data. The 15-page chart shared in a LinkedIn post represents one scientist’s retrospective account of past awards, not a mandated page or word allocation. For an actual NSF submission, consult the current PAPPG and the specific solicitation; intellectual merit and broader impacts are independently reviewed.
The prior drafts already featured a clear state-of-the-art review, explicit hypotheses, three aims, baselines, falsifiers, held-out testing and cautious interpretation. Expanding them to 15 pages would be counterproductive for a lab-introduction package. The deficits relative to grant-review logic were more practical: outputs of aim 3 were implicit; immediate dependencies and stage gates were scattered; the unique intellectual contribution was late in the text; and societal/teaching benefits were not articulated.
A real solicitation, funded duration and budget, data/specimen access or a confirmed contingency dataset, sample-size and design analysis, complete methodology, team roles and facilities, a full data-management plan, preliminary results, a distinct evaluated broader-impacts partnership and any prior NSF support sections applicable to the eventual PI/co-PIs. The open teaching resource described here is a credible concept-note seed, not a fully costed/assessed outreach program. The studies remain proposals, not validated claims.
The three HTML proposal texts were rebuilt directly from their edited Word paragraphs; original scripts, canvas animations and home-page assets are retained. All three Word files were rendered and visually inspected as two-page documents. The website proposal sections were checked for paragraph-level equivalence with DOCX, scripts passed syntax checks, and the home page and the three interactive demo scripts remained byte-for-byte unchanged outside the proposal sections. A live Chromium/browser navigation smoke test was attempted but blocked by the execution environment; no claim of successful visual web testing is made.