Meridian Cambridge Visiting Researcher Programme: Turn AI safety ideas into funded projects in one week!

Meridian

April 6-12, 2025 | Cambridge, UK
Apply Now (Deadline: March 19, 2025, anywhere on Earth)

We're excited to announce Meridian and Cambridge AI Safety Hub’s Visiting Researcher Programme, running from April 6-12, 2025, in Cambridge, UK. This programme offers the opportunity for researchers to transform their AI safety research ideas into robust, fundable proposals — and fast.

What makes this programme different?

If you’ve completed a programme like MATS, MARS, ARENA, ML4G, or ERA, you likely know a lot about AI safety. But what next? Many researchers hit a wall between gaining knowledge and launching full-time research projects. That’s the gap we’re aiming to fill.

This programme offers a structured sprint to transform your research ideas into submission-ready proposals for Open Philanthropy’s $40 million AI safety research initiative. Unlike typical upskilling programs, our focus is on team formation, project development, and grant writing — not teaching technical skills. By the end of the week, you’ll have a polished proposal and targeted, actionable feedback from experts in the field.

Full Support Provided:

Travel expense reimbursement to and from Cambridge
Accommodation during the programme week
Workspace, resources, and meals during programme activities

Researchers who secure funding will be invited back to Cambridge to continue their work at Meridian, with visa and accommodation support (subject to approval and funding availability). We’ll also provide research management and administrative assistance so you can focus on what matters: your research.

Programme breakdown:

Days 1-2: Explore research directions and meet potential collaborators through introductory sessions, workshops, and our speed cofounder matching process. You'll connect with researchers whose skills complement yours and begin developing project ideas together.
Day 3: Form your research team and refine your project focus. By the end of day three, you'll have a clear concept and research direction with your newly-formed team.
Days 4-5: Learn effective grant writing strategies from experts and develop your proposal with structured feedback. Sessions will cover research impact assessment and alignment with funder priorities.
Day 6: Present your proposal to peers and experts who will offer feedback and help you strengthen your proposal's technical content.
Day 7: Polish your submission with final technical reviews. By day's end, you'll have a completed proposal ready for the April 15th deadline.

Who Should Apply?

Researchers with expertise in machine learning, computer science, mathematics, or related fields
Graduates of programmes such as MATS, MARS, ARENA, ML4G, SPAR, and ERA with AI safety knowledge looking to transition to full-time research
Individuals with established research portfolios interested in transitioning to AI safety
PhD candidates, recent graduates, or postdoctoral researchers exploring AI safety directions
Principal Investigators and professors interested in incorporating AI safety into their research agenda
People based in Cambridge or willing/excited to work there and contribute to strengthening Cambridge as a hub for AI safety research

Apply Now

The deadline to apply is March 19, 2025 anywhere on Earth. We’re limiting participation to around 30 researchers, so apply early. All the details and the application form are available here: Meridian Visiting Researcher Programme.

We look forward to seeing your ideas take shape!

The Meridian Team

24 Reactions

More posts like this

Comments3

Sorted by

New & upvoted

Click to highlight new comments since: Today at 10:33 AM

Ryan KiddMar 92

This seems like a great initiative! However, I don't expect this "grantwriting bootcamp" model to benefit the majority of MATS alumni compared to:

Longer duration, more resourced independent research programs like the MATS extension program, Constellation Visiting Fellows Program, and the CHAI Research Fellowship that provide high-quality mentorship and job security for 6-12 months;
Dedicated start-up incubator programs like Catalyze Impact, Entrepeneur First def/acc, and Y Combinator that provide seed funding, co-founder matching, and start-up advice;
Longer duration, more established academic PhD/Postdoc programs that provide high-quality mentorship and legible credentials, e.g. via the Vitalik Buterin PhD Fellowship in AI Existential Safety and labs like UCB CHAI, NYU ARG, MIT AAG, Mila, KASL, MIT Tegmark Group, etc.

I can't speak for the other AI safety research programs on your list, but from my experience at MATS, alumni are principally worried about (in order):

Software engineering skills to pass AI lab coding tests;
High-quality peer-reviewed publications at top ML conferences to get into AI lab research jobs or top PhD programs;
Further high-quality mentorship;
Further connections to research collaborators.

In the past, acceptance into the MATS extension program literally required submitting a grant proposal and receiving external funding, generally from the LTFF or Open Phil. On average, 81% of alumni who apply have received LTFF or Open Phil grants (or equivalent AI lab contracting roles) for independent research post-program, even without the current (large) RFPs! Our Research Management staff are trained to help scholars submit AI safety grant proposals and we require all scholars to complete a Research Plan mid-program that doubles as a grant proposal. I think that the optimal program to help most MATS alumni looks less like a "grantwriting bootcamp" (though I'm sure some will benefit) and more like the programs I listed above. That said, I think the grantwriting bootcamp model will certainly benefit some early career researchers. I'm happy to call and chat more about this if you like!

Ryan KiddMar 91

If I were building a grantwriting bootcamp, my primary concerns would be:

Where will successful grantees work?
- I've found that independent researchers greatly benefit from a shared office space and community, for social connection, high-quality peer feedback, and centralizing operations costs.
- Current AI safety offices seem to be overflowing. We likely need further, high-capacity AI safety offices to support the influx of independent researchers from Open Phil's RFPs.
- I think that, in general, employment in a highly effective organization is more impactful than independent research for the majority of projects and researchers. While I greatly support the new Open Phil RFPs, I hope that more of their grants go towards setting up highly effective organizations, like nonprofit FROs, that can absorb and scale talent.
- I see the primary benefit of the MATS extension program as a means of providing further research mentorship (albeit with more accountability and autonomy than the main program) with longer time horizons to complete research projects. The infrastructure we provide is quite significant and increasing the number of independent researchers without also scaling long-term support systems will likely not see optimal results.
How will successful grantees obtain mentorship and high-quality feedback loops?
- Even with the optimal project proposal, emerging researchers seem to benefit substantially from high quality mentorship, particularly over the course of a research project. I do not believe that all of this support should be front-loaded.
- I would support an accompanying long-term peer support or mentorship program after the grantwriting bootcamp. I apologize if you were already planning this!
Who will employ grantees on the conclusion of their research?
- This is a significant question to MATS as well. I currently believe that high-quality research during the program is a strong enough output alone to justify the cost. However, ideally, most MATS alumni would find employment post-program. The main roadblocks to this employment seem to be software engineering skills (which points to ARENA-like coding bootcamps as a solution) and high-quality peer-reviewed publications (which usually need strong mentorship).
- At the moment, I think "better grant proposals" is not a significant bottleneck to MATS alumni getting jobs. Rather, I think coding skills and high quality publications are the limiting factors. Also, I think there are far too few jobs to go around compared to the scale of the AI safety problem, so I also support more startup accelerators.

MeridianMar 102

Hey Ryan,

Thanks for taking the time to write this out and share your experience. I think these are good points, and to quickly respond [apologies in advance for any spelling or grammar errors]:

We agree completely that longer programs like the MATS extension offer benefits that a one-week program simply can't match. The in-person week isn't meant to replace those options, but we are hoping that it does the following:

1) Creates opportunities for researchers to connect with each other and maybe have longer term collaborations with other AIS researchers they counterfactually wouldn’t have met.

2) Helps establish Cambridge as an AIS hub, as Cambridge has high talent density and low space constraints. Our vision is for Cambridge to complement larger hubs like Berkeley and London.

3) Lay the groundwork for long term opportunities and projects out of Meridian. This is very much a first iteration that was put together quickly with existing funding because we saw a need. Our hope is to learn from this initial programme and build towards offering stable and funded visiting researcher positions. At minimum, we see independent research projects as providing further opportunities to perform research, even with a deficit of full time jobs in the space.

4) While you mentioned that better grant proposals might not be a major bottleneck for MATS alumni, we’ve heard from others that support in translating research ideas into funded projects could be useful. It’s possible our sample isn’t fully representative, but we wanted to act quickly to fill this gap, even if this first version is a bit of an experiment.

On what happens after the bootcamp week, we're offering successful grantees the opportunity to work out of Meridian, with visa and accommodation support, precisely because we recognize that independent researchers benefit enormously from shared space and community. We also agree about the need for ongoing mentorship rather than just front-loaded support. The week is designed to kickstart projects, but we're planning mentorship structures that continue well beyond the initial week. I should have made this clearer in our announcement - thanks for highlighting this gap.

Finally, thanks for your note about employment pathways, that’s helpful to know. We felt well-equipped to help with grant proposals particularly with the current OP RFP, but to be clear the actual grant proposals are part of a larger story that is focused around collaboration networks and building long-term research pathways. Your observation that coding skills and quality publications are bigger limiting factors is interesting and it’s worth us thinking about more. As it stands, our programme isn't designed to directly address these bottlenecks, but maybe it should.

Thanks for offering to chat more, and I’ll reach out privately but wanted to quickly acknowledge some of your points and thank you again for the feedback! It’s always welcome and appreciated.

Olivia and The Meridian Team