After the evaluation stage that is carried out with the help of mathematical algorithm, the projects pass to the stage of an expert assessment, which only make additions to the initial mathematical analysis. Even taking into consideration the request of experts based upon subjective judgments it will be impossible to change radically the main evaluation index of the project. Nevertheless, human scientific assessment will amend the figures with vigorous debates and comments accessible to all.

The expert evaluation means manual verification of projects according to the characteristics set by the algorithm. Valuated amount of each evaluation index will demonstrate the overall rating of the project. Each evaluation index will have a rating scale, in terms of which it was evaluated by the mathematical algorithm. In a case when the user does not agree with the automatically generated evaluation, he\she is entitled to change the evaluation index and forecast in his\her own way.

We presume there can be several behavior models of SNcoin holders in different situations:

• " Specialist ":
  An expert in a certain field of science, who has installed a filter and evaluates only those projects, which referred to his\her qualification. In this case, the specialist has a professional interest and studies thoroughly the information about projects, including personal communication directly with the developer. A professional approach to the project increases the possibility of concurrence of expert opinion to the final evaluation of the project.

• " Indifferent ":
  A member of the Bounty campaign etc., used to do two jobs through the Internet, believing that the platform will help him to earn some "extra" money. He is not an expert in certain industries. He is engaged in project evaluation relying on instinct. However, at the same time, he is careful of a ban and tries to place more or less deliberate rates, without overloading the system.

• "Bot":
  The bot will evaluate projects in a random mode. Since the evaluation is going to be carried out corresponding to each characteristic, it is easy to put a scale in the script terms. The evaluation will be conducted within this scale. For example, it will be possible to install a time-dependent random. Such manipulations are controlled by the system, therefore, an inappropriate evaluation will be banned.

• "Optimistic Bot":
  A user who evaluates each characteristic to the maximum degree in the project. Thus, hoping that the possibility to earn money in such situation significantly increases the "optimist bot" expects to draw the interest from those projects, which will get the funding. Such activity also will be prevented by the system. After all, irrespective of whether the project attracted the required financing or was not launched, the expert's commission depends on the correct final assessment by the time conclusion of index evaluation. That is, if the user votes as it will be in the final evaluation, which will be corrected again by a mathematical algorithm after completion of the evaluation period by people, the user gets the maximum possible "steak".

All these and many other indicators give our mathematicians an opportunity to analyze the presence of a bot instead of a user, as well as to find out how correctly the user carries out the evaluation.

Some experts will carry out wrong evaluation not because of the work of bots, but because of their own incompetence in the matter. That is the work of the mathematical algorithm, with the help of which project review is carried out during the entry action and the work of statistical application on the platform will eliminate indications in the process of the experts' work. For example, there is project which has high costs and underachievement ща long-term benefits или perspectivity (на ваш выбор). According to characteristics, the user has highly evaluated the project, but it is clear that these characteristics do not correlated to the reality. In this situation, the system will send user a message and announce the first warning. Let's call it a yellow card. But, as in football, there comes a time of a red card and if the expert continues an unexamined analysis, the system simply stops access to work and withdraws the opportunity of additional earnings for a while or forever.

Well, what if we have to deal with a "bot optimist"? Let's illustrate elections — the compulsory voting by a whole troop of soldiers (which usually happens in countries with authoritarian regime). Then the system enables an analysis, deduced by a group of scientists from Madrid and Vienna: Raul Jimenez, Manuel Hidalgo , and Peter Klimek. This analysis is based on statistical indicators, allows to convict the fraudster quickly. The combination of all means of a quality control of experts' work is going to keep the system under control, without showing peak values, which would make a particular project an absolute leader in relation to the other ones.

Expert knowledge

The scientists, who submitted their projects for the public consideration certainly are skeptical: "How high is the level of public competence during evaluation of a project if they are not scientists"? "Wisdom of the crowd" has its pros and cons, especially in matters relating to research and development. The acquaintance with the materials of the project is difficult, and for some users, is an overwhelming task. Apart from users, certain works are difficult for perception even for scientist. What should experts do in this situation?

Additional information about the project:

1. As any other crowdfunding platform, we will provide every project with a personal page describing its details, media materials, answers to frequently asked questions and developer's contacts. All this will sufficiently facilitate perception of the project.

2. All projects will be evaluated in accordance with characteristics. If an expert is competent in 3 out of 50 characteristics, he may adjust the filter in accordance to the current index and evaluate projects in a comfortable mode. Thus, it is possible to become the best expert on the website not only in accordance with the project direction (medicine, bioinformatics, geology), but also in regard to the index — the scientific novelty of projects, project risks and so on. It is important to note that experts will not evaluate projects or their areas where they are incompetent. Incorrect actions will be fined and influence their overall compensation after the completion of an assessment.

3. The impact of geopolitical environment in which the expert lives. It is one of the key moments in the work of the platform. The decentralization of the platform where projects are going to be launched will open way to the freedom of expression and promulgation of those projects which in the ordinary course of events even wouldn't be considered in public. Many projects are blocked at the stage of funding search. The decentralization will make it possible to look at projects and their exercising in ordinary life differently. A fresh expert look at research and developments and direct communication with scientists will give a new perspective view. The close relationship between scientists and the society will become a launching ground for new ideas. Of course, such a symbiosis will be a good impetus for the further development of innovative activities, which can act as a chain reaction at all economic levels.