Again, just a suggestion. But some uniformity would be nice!
- Be brief. Let’s not overwhelm the reviewers with text. Last year’s part B was 60 pages long; and sections that have a similar role in the table of content were of very different lengths. For example, section 1.2.2 (description of the work carried out in WP2) was 6 pages long, while section 1.2.3 (description of the work carried out in WP3) was 16 pages long. In this section, I recommend omitting discussing results (covered by Part A) and certainly not listing the events we participated in (also covered by part A). Refer, do not repeat: repetition will only annoy the reviewer.
- Impact section by partner. I wrote a short project-wide “Impact on science” – that we share, as a project. But the “Impact on business” will differ across partners. So I only wrote Edgeryders’s, and I invite you do to the same for your organisation.
- Exploitation section also by partner.