IPTO_OW_Abstract_Template__Required_.docx
DOCX document 49 KB Posted
- Opportunity number
- HR001126S0011
About this file
This is an abstract submission template required for the Information Processing Techniques Office Office-Wide (IPTO OW) Broad Agency Announcement (BAA HR001126S0011) administered by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). All proposers must use this template to submit fully conforming abstracts, which are limited to a maximum of 5 pages (excluding cover sheet, table of contents, AI utilization disclosure, bibliography, and optional technical papers). Abstracts must be submitted in PDF or Microsoft Word format via DARPA's Broad Agency Announcement Tool (BAAT) with the recommended file naming convention "Organization Name_IPTO OW Abstract." The template requires submission of standard proposal elements including cover sheet information (proposer organization, SAM.gov Unique Entity ID, technical and administrative points of contact, team members, award instrument requested, estimated total cost, and performance period), along with technical content addressing goals and impact, technical approach, capabilities and management plan, cost and schedule, and bibliography.
The template establishes specific formatting requirements (12-point font, 1-inch margins on 8.5" by 11" pages) and mandates disclosure of artificial intelligence tool usage in both abstract preparation and proposed research performance. Proposers must describe how AI was leveraged in brainstorming, literature synthesis, technical drafting, editorial refinement, and formatting phases, with required safeguards ensuring human authorship and validation. The technical approach section must address current state-of-the-art limitations, proposed innovations, implementation plans for the Department of War testing community, resilient software delivery plans (if applicable), technical challenges with solutions, and measurable milestones demonstrating progress. The capabilities section requires identification of a Principal Investigator, team expertise summary including subawardees, organizational roles and responsibilities, and evidence of successful prior research execution (particularly peer-reviewed publications). This BAA seeks revolutionary research ideas not addressed by ongoing IPTO programs or other published solicitations.
IPTO OW Abstract Template [Required]
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Classified_Submission_Requirements__Instructions_and_Procedures.docx | DOCX document | |
| HR001126S0011-Amendment-02.pdf | ||
| HR001126S0011-Amendment-01.pdf | ||
| IPTO_OW_Proposal_Templates.zip | ZIP file | |
| PKG00293409.docx | DOCX document | |
| IPTO_Office_Wide_Proposal_Templates_Zip_file.zip | ZIP file | |
| IPTO_Office_Wide_Abstract_Template__Required_.docx | DOCX document | |
| Common_Disclosures_Forms_Zip_file.zip | ZIP file | |
| Classified_Submission_Requirements__Instructions_and_Procedures.docx | DOCX document | |
| HR001126S0011.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
COVER SHEET
Optional company logo
HR001126S0011
IPTO OW Abstract Source Selection Sensitive – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104
Abstract Title
Proposer Organization
SAM.gov Unique Entity ID (UEI)
| Technical Point of Contact (POC) |
| Name: |
Mailing Address:
Telephone:
Email:
| Administrative POC |
| Name: |
Mailing Address:
Telephone:
Email:
| Other Team Members (subcontractors and consultants), if known/applicable |
| Technical POC Name: |
Organization:
Technical POC Name:
Organization:
| Award Instrument Requested |
| Choose one: Procurement Contract, Grants, Cooperative Agreement, Other Transaction for Research, Other Transaction for Prototype |
| Estimated Total Cost (Base + Options) |
| $ |
Estimated Period of Performance
Identify any other solicitation(s) to which this concept has been proposed.
ABSTRACT GUIDELINES: Use of this template is required for all abstract submissions. Proposers must include all information in this template to constitute a fully conforming abstract submission.
Page Limit Requirement: Abstracts shall not exceed a maximum of 5 pages. This page limit does NOT include the following:
· Abstract Coversheet
· Table of Contents
· Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Utilization
· Bibliography (Optional)
· Technical Papers (Optional)
Formatting Requirements: All submissions must be typed in English on 8.5" by 11" pages using 12-point font with 1" margins all around. 8 or 10-point fonts may be used for figures, tables, and charts. Use of diagram(s) or figure(s) to depict the essence of the proposed solution is encouraged. Do NOT include elaborate brochures or marketing materials.
Content Requirements: Content requirements are noted in blue font under each section of the abstract template. Proposers should delete all content requirements prior to abstract submission.
Submission Requirements: Abstract submissions must be submitted in PDF or Microsoft Word formats. The recommended file naming convention is “Organization Name_IPTO OW Abstract.” All proprietary information should be appropriately marked. NOTE: "Confidential" is a classification marking used to control the dissemination of U.S. Government National Security Information as dictated in Executive Order 13526 and should not be used to identify proprietary business information.
UNCLASSIFIED abstracts must be submitted via DARPA’s Broad Agency Announcement Tool (BAAT). Please visit Proposer Instructions and General Terms and Conditions for specific information regarding submission methods through BAAT. Please note, BAAT is a method of secure transmission for CUI documentation. Submissions sent through other mediums, channels, or after the prescribed deadline will not be accepted.
CLASSIFIED abstracts must be submitted in accordance with the requirements, instructions, and procedures contained within the Classified Submissions, Instructions, and Procedures attachment. Classified submissions must NOT be submitted through the (BAAT) or Grants.gov.
Goals and Impact [Describe what is being proposed and what difference it will make (qualitatively and quantitatively) if successful. Describe the innovative aspects of the project in the context of existing capabilities and approaches, clearly delineating the relationship of this work to any other projects from the past and present.]
Technical Approach [Provide answers to the following questions:
· What is the proposed work attempting to accomplish or do?
· How is the work performed today (what is the state of the art or practice), and what are the limitations?
· What is new in your approach, and why do you think it will be successful?
· How would the DoW testing community implement the proposed approach/work?
· If applicable, what are the plans to deliver resilient software?
Outline and address technical challenges inherent in the approach and possible solutions for overcoming potential problems. Provide appropriate measurable milestones (quantitative if possible) at intermediate stages of the project to demonstrate progress and a plan for achieving the milestones.]
Capabilities/Management Plan [Provide a brief summary of the expertise of the team, including subawardees and key personnel. While teaming arrangements do not need to be finalized at the time of abstract submission, mention of potential teaming/collaboration arrangements is highly encouraged.
Identify a Principal Investigator (PI) for the project and include a description of the team’s organization, including roles and responsibilities. Describe similar research projects on which the PI and/or other key personnel have been performers and provide strong evidence of the successful execution of these research projects. Strong evidence of successful research execution would include, for example, technical papers published in peer-reviewed journals. Note that patents applied for and technical papers released to the internet without peer review would not be considered strong evidence of research success.]
Cost and Schedule [Provide a cost estimate for resources (e.g. labor, materials) and any subawardees over the entire program (base + options).]
Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Utilization Proposers must disclose how AI tools were used in the preparation of this abstract, and how AI will be leveraged during the performance of the proposed research.
· Rule of Use: AI may be used for administrative drafting, formatting, or editorial refinement of this abstract. However, the core scientific hypotheses, technical methodologies, and proposed operational solutions must be the original product of the human authors.
· Adjunct, Not Replacement: The use of AI to enhance and accelerate technical aspects of the proposed research is permitted, but AI may only be used as an adjunct to—and not a replacement for—human creativity, insight, and direction.
Part A: AI Use in Abstract Preparation Check all that apply:
☐ No AI tools were used in the preparation, drafting, or formatting of this abstract.
☐ AI tools were used during the development of this abstract. (If selected, you must complete the table in Part B below).
Part B: AI Use in the Performance of Proposed Research For every phase of the abstract development where AI was leveraged, indicate the specific tool used, the nature of its application, and how human authorship and scientific direction were maintained.
| Abstract Development Phase |
| Specific AI Tool(s) Used |
| How the Tool Was Utilized |
| Human Authorship & Validation Safeguard |
| 1. Brainstorming & Concept Exploration |
| e.g., ChatGPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, etc. |
| Example: Used to brainstorm potential edge cases for our proposed testing framework or query historical analogies. |
| Example: All proposed hypotheses and technical methodologies were generated by the PI; AI was only used to stress-test our pre-existing assumptions. |
| [Proposer Input] |
| [Proposer Input] |
| 2. Literature Synthesis & Prior Art |
| e.g., Consensus, Elicit, Perplexity, etc. |
| Example: Used to rapidly identify peer-reviewed articles on [Insert Topic] to ensure our background section was comprehensive. |
| Example: Human authors manually retrieved and verified every cited source to ensure no "hallucinated" citations or false claims were included. |
| [Proposer Input] |
| [Proposer Input] |
| 3. Technical Drafting & Expansion |
| e.g., Gemini, Copilot, etc. |
| Example: Used to expand rough technical bullet points drafted by the subject matter expert (SME) into cohesive paragraphs for Section 2. |
| Example: The core scientific formulas, architectures, and performance metrics were drafted by the SME; AI was only used to improve sentence flow. |
| [Proposer Input] |
| [Proposer Input] |
| 4. Editorial Refinement & Constraints |
| e.g., Grammarly, Hemingway, etc. |
| Example: Used to edit the draft for active voice, correct grammatical errors, and reduce word count to fit the 5-page BAA limit. |
| Example: Human authors reviewed every suggested edit to ensure the precise scientific meaning of our technical terminology was not altered. |
| [Proposer Input] |
| [Proposer Input] |
| 5. Formatting & Structuring |
| e.g., Custom markdown/LaTeX formatters. |
| Example: Used to generate the Markdown code for tables and convert raw bullet points into the required BAA template format. |
| Example: Human authors verified that all tables accurately mapped to our program's proposed milestones and budget figures. |
| [Proposer Input] |
| [Proposer Input] |
Bibliography (optional) [Provide a bibliography with links to relevant papers, references, reports, etc. Please use bold font for papers, references, reports, etc. listed that are (co-)authored by individual(s) on the abstract performer team, including subawardees and key personnel.]
Technical Papers (optional) Are Technical Papers included as attachments to this submission? ☐ Yes ☐ No
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .