Abstract
The article presents a comprehensive review of international systems for the evaluation of scientific and technical projects with a detailed analysis of the experience of four key regions – the United States, the European Union, Japan and China. Institutional models for organizing the evaluation, principles for selecting and evaluating projects, and mechanisms for preventing conflicts of interest are considered. Particular attention is paid to the criteria used, including scientific novelty, potential socio-economic significance, innovativeness and compliance with strategic priorities. The aim of the study is the analysis of the processes of digitalization of the evaluation, including the introduction of automated systems for selecting experts, the use of publication activity databases and the integration of tools for assessing scientific contribution. A comparison of the functionality of modern international digital platforms, such as OpenAIRE, Elsevier Expert Lookup, ResearchGate and Publons, is carried out, identifying their advantages and limitations. Based on comparative analysis, the strengths of national systems are highlighted: focus on public significance, anonymization and twoway feedback, interim monitoring of projects, strategic focus on priority areas and the use of artificial intelligence. Based on the results of the study, recommendations are proposed for Kazakhstan, including the creation of a national integrated digital platform for expertise using artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies, as well as the introduction of elements of anonymization and interim control. The proposed measures are aimed at increasing transparency, reducing timeframes and improving the quality of expert decisions in the field of scientific and technological progress.