Advanced and Innovative hardware components for Virtual Worlds (RIA) (Virtual Worlds Partnership)

Expected outcomes

• The topic does not say whether all outcomes must be addressed; treat them all as relevant.
• For each outcome (EO1), name who will use or adopt your results (a specific group, not “industry” or “society”), how they get them, and the indicator that shows the change, with baseline, target and date.
• Use the topic's own words for each outcome, so the evaluator can tick it off.

What the scope asks for

Evaluators check the proposal against these sentences of the scope. Answer each one visibly, in the call's own words.

• “To ensure this next generation of engaging and lifelike immersion, all senses must be stimulated (sight, hearing, feel, touch, smell), for a fully immersive close-to-reality experience.”
• “Proposals should investigate novel scientific approaches or push the limit of existing ones to improve the synchronization and integration of the different modalities.”
• “Proposals are expected to integrate various components in fully tested devices, demonstrating the usefulness and efficiency of their system in illustrative scenarios in the industrial and societal contexts.”
• “Proposals should focus on performant, reliable, miniaturised, interoperable advanced and innovative technologies, with inclusivity, energy consumption and energy efficiency at the centre of concerns.”
• “This topic requires the effective contribution of SSH disciplines and the involvement of SSH experts, institutions as well as the inclusion of relevant SSH expertise, in order to produce meaningful and significant effects enhancing the societal impact of the related research activities.”
• “The Consortium should pay attention to developing solutions that are reliable, robust and interoperable.”
• “Proposals should leverage existing open standards and technologies in the domain of Virtual Worlds, while contributing to ongoing standardisation work.”

Conditions that shape the proposal

• Part B, sections 1–3: 40 pages (standard application form). Text beyond the limit is not read; tables and figures count.
• TRL: the topic expects TRL 5 by the end of the project. State where you start and the evidence for it.
• Other Eligible Conditions: “Subject to restrictions for the protection of European communication networks.”

Impact pathway and traps

• The topic asks for social sciences and humanities (SSH) expertise. Evaluators look for SSH partners with a real role in the methodology, not a token task.
• The scope expects pilots or demonstration. Name the sites, the partners who run them and what is measured there.
• Standardisation is mentioned. Name the committees or bodies and the partner who engages with them.
• Keep outputs, outcomes and impacts apart: what you deliver, what changes when others use it, and the long-term effect.
• Link your outcomes to the destination's expected impacts in the Work Programme. Destination impacts are long-term effects, not project deliverables.
• Name the barriers outside the project (regulation, markets, user behaviour) that could block uptake, and what you will do if they do.
• Section 2.3 (the summary canvas) is optional on this call; the old split into scientific, economic and societal impact is no longer required.