Dr. José Manuel Pereira Dias de Castro Lopes, Full Professor at the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Porto, Vice-Rector of the same University:

I hereby announce that, by my order of 6 of May 2026, in the exercise of the powers delegated to me by Order No. 9493/2022, published in the Diário da República (Official Gazette), 2nd series, No. 148 of 2 August, and for a period of 30 working days, counting from the working day immediately following the publication of this notice in the Diário da República (Official Gazette) a document-based public competition is opened for two Assistant Professors in the subject area of Informatics Engineering at the Faculty of Engineering of the University of Porto. 

1. Applicable legal provisions

Articles 37 to 51, 61 and 62-A of the Statute of the University Teaching Career (ECDU), republished by Decree Law No. 205/2009, of 31 August, and amended by Law No. 8/2010, of 13 May and Regulation of Competitions for the Recruitment of Full, Associate and Assistant Professors of the University of Porto (hereinafter referred to as Regulation), approved by Order No. 12913/2010, published in the Diário da República, 2nd series, no. 154, of 10 August and amended by Resolution (extract) no. 380/2019, published in the Diário da República, 2nd series, no. 64, of 1 April..

2. Requirements for administrative admission to the competition

Under the terms of Article 41-A of the ECDU, only those who hold a PhD degree may be admitted to this competition. 

If the doctorate was awarded by a foreign higher education institution, it must be recognised by a Portuguese higher education institution, in accordance with the provisions of Decree-Law No. 66/2018, published in the Diário da República (Official Gazette), 1st series, No. 157, of 16 August. This formality must be completed by the deadline for signing the contract.

3. Approval on absolute merit

3.1. If there are no grounds for rejecting the applications, the Jury shall decide on their approval or non-approval on absolute merit, by justified roll-call vote, with no abstentions allowed.

3.2. Candidates who are approved by an absolute majority of the voting members of the jury shall be considered approved on absolute merit.

3.3. The approval on absolute merit of candidates depends on the possession of a comprehensive curriculum vitae that the jury considers to be of scientific and pedagogical merit, research capacity and activity developed, compatible with the disciplinary area for which the competition was opened and appropriate to the respective teaching category, as documented in the respective information submitted to the competition.

3.4. For the purposes of the assessment referred to in the previous point, a favourable vote must be based on the cumulative fulfilment of the following circumstances or requirements of a qualitative and quantitative nature:

a) hold a PhD in the subject area of Informatics Engineering or another area considered appropriate, taking into account the scientific subareas of the Department of Informatics Engineering (DEI)* of the Faculty of Engineering of the University of Porto (FEUP);

b) have a curriculum vitae whose merit the members of the jury consider to be of a scientific level, research capacity and activity developed, compatible with the disciplinary area and category for which the competition is open;

c) have high-quality, significant and proven scientific activity in the scientific subarea of Sciences and Technology of Programming (CTP) of DEI*, specifically in one or more of the topics identified in 4.2, in the five (5) years immediately prior to the date of this notice;

d) have selected scientific publications (in the sets of articles referred to in 6.2 f) of quality, preferably as first author, and which prove the candidate's ability to publish in leading journals/conferences (e.g., IEEE/ACM Transactions, Elsevier/Springer SCImago SJR Q1, CORE Ranking A*/A) on CTP topics identified in point 4.2.

e) have submitted a high-quality, consistent, up-to-date and feasible scientific and teaching programme, including university extension activities and the economic and social valorisation of knowledge — whose feasibility is evidenced by the candidate’s prior scientific work — and which is capable of contributing advances to the state of the art in one or more of the CTP topics identified in point 4.2, with the publication of results in leading CTP journals and/or conferences.

The five-year period referred to in subparagraph c) and point 4.2 may be extended by the jury, at the candidate's request, when justified by the suspension of scientific activity for socially protected reasons, exclusively for reasons of parental leave. The extension shall be one year per birth during the five-year period, and the candidate must provide a birth certificate for each child or other official document establishing their connection to the child.

(*DEI scientific sub-areas: 

https://sigarra.up.pt/feup/pt/UNI_GERAL.UNIDADE_VIEW?pv_unidade=151).

4. Evaluation and ranking in relative merit

Once the candidates approved on absolute merit have been definitively identified, they are ranked in relative merit, based on the aspects and criteria for ranking, their respective weighting and final assessment system, established in accordance with the provisions of Article 50, No 6 of the ECDU and Article 16 of the Regulations.

4.1. Assessment methodology

Candidates approved on absolute merit are subject to a curriculum assessment, which may be complemented by a public presentation hearing, to which candidates approved on absolute merit will be subject, aimed at clarifying aspects related to the curriculum and the scientific-pedagogical programme, the extension and economic and social value of knowledge, bearing in mind the general duties assigned to university teachers by Article 4 of the ECDU, focusing on the aspects and respective criteria identified below.

4.2. Dimensions of the evaluation

The evaluation of candidates should place particular emphasis on the work carried out in the last 5 years (counted up to the application deadline) and focus on the following aspects and Programme, highlighting the curricular aspects in the subject area for which the competition was opened, with particular emphasis on the scientific subarea of Sciences and Technology of Programming (CTP) of DEI* and the following topics related to CTP: fundamentals and paradigms of programming languages, language processing and execution, formal methods and security in the field of programming languages, compilers and code generation: 

a) Scientific Merit (VMC) – 65%

b) Experience and Pedagogical Merit (VEMP) – 12% 

c) University Extension and Economic and Social Valorisation of Knowledge Tasks (VTC) - 8%

d) Scientific-Pedagogical, Extension and Economic and Social Valorisation of Knowledge Programme (PCP) – 15%

4.3. Evaluation criteria

The criteria to be taken into account in the evaluation of each of the evaluation and programme dimensions identified in the previous point and the weighting to be assigned to each of them in the final classification are set out below.

4.3.1. Criteria for evaluating the Scientific Merit (VMC) aspect – 65%

4.3.1.1. CMC1 - Scientific output

Quality and quantity of scientific output in the areas for which the recruitment process is open (books, articles in journals, publications in conference proceedings, etc.) expressed by the number and type of publications, and by the recognition given to them by the scientific community (reflected in the quality of the scientific journals in which they are published, the places of publication and presentation, and the references made to them by other authors).

 Preference will be given to the publication of scientific articles in A* or A conferences (CORE ranking), in Elsevier/Springer journals catalogued as Q1 in SCImago (SJR), in journals and conferences with ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) or IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) with an emphasis on ACM Transactions or IEEE Transactions journals. Clear preference will be given to publications in leading journals and conferences with significant contributions to the development of the subject area covered by the competition, and especially in the scientific subarea of Sciences and Technology of Programming (CTP) of DEI* and in the topics listed in point 4.2. 

Applications must include:

•    a description of the strategy and practices followed in terms of publications and the choice of conferences/workshops/journals;

•    clear identification of works first published in conferences/workshops and subsequently in journals, resulting from article extensions;

•    identification of the practices followed by the community regarding the order of authors in scientific publications.

In assessing quality, special emphasis should be given to articles submitted in which the candidate is the first author and to:

•    Quality and relevance of the 5 (five) scientific articles mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted, published in the last 5 (five) years, which candidates consider most representative of their research activity; 

•    The quality and relevance of the 5 (five) scientific articles mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted, which candidates consider most representative of their research activity to date.

Candidates must add a brief justification of the international scientific importance of the articles submitted and a description of the candidate's contributions to each of these articles.

(Submitting fewer than the required number of selected contributions is not a factor for exclusion.)

4.3.1.2. CMC2 - Coordination and implementation of scientific projects

Quality and quantity of scientific projects funded on a competitive basis by public funds, through national or international agencies or by companies, in which the candidate has participated (indicating the role played) and the results obtained in them, with emphasis on project coordination.

In assessing quality, consideration should be given to whether the projects are international, bilateral or national, their size and funding obtained, the degree of competition, the evaluations to which the projects were subject and the prototypes produced, in particular if they resulted in products or services.

In assessing quality, special emphasis should also be placed on the quality, relevance and contributions related to the 5 (five) R&D projects mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most representative. Candidates should describe the national/international relevance of each project, the funding entity and the overall budget (and local budget if different), the candidate's main contributions during the preparation of the proposal and during the execution of the project, the roles performed by the candidate in each project and the main tasks they performed. 

(the submission of fewer than the established number of selected contributions is not a factor for exclusion)

4.3.1.3. CMC3 - Intervention in scientific and professional communities

Capacity for intervention in scientific and professional communities, expressed, in particular, through collaboration in the editing of journals, participation in organising committees and technical and scientific committees of international conferences, presentation of invited lectures, participation in academic juries outside the institution itself, and the obtaining of awards and distinctions.

4.3.2. Criteria for assessing Experience and Pedagogical Merit (VEMP) – 12%

4.3.2.1. CEMP1 - Pedagogical projects

Promotion of new pedagogical projects (e.g., development of new course programmes, creation and coordination of new courses or study programmes, etc.) or reform and improvement of existing projects (e.g., reformulation of existing course programmes, participation in the reorganisation of existing study programmes), as well as the implementation of projects with an impact on the teaching/learning process. Evidence of a link between teaching and research activities, namely in the involvement of undergraduate students in research activities and the integration of master's students in research projects.

4.3.2.2. CEMP2 - Production of teaching material

Quality and quantity of teaching material produced by the candidate, particularly in the form of books, as well as teaching-related publications in prestigious international journals or conferences.

In assessing quality, special emphasis should be placed on the quality, relevance and contributions related to the 5 (five) contributions to teaching mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most representative, describing their main contributions and tasks performed. 

(The submission of fewer than five selected contributions is not a factor for exclusion.)

4.3.2.3. CEMP3 - Teaching activity

Experience, scope and quality of the teaching activity carried out by the candidate. Whenever possible, the assessment of the quality of the teaching activity carried out by the candidate should use the results of objective methods based on opinion surveys (pedagogical surveys) and peer evaluation.

In assessing quality, special emphasis should be placed on the quality, relevance and contributions related to the 5 (five) curricular units taught and mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most representative, describing the main contributions and tasks performed by the candidate and including an analysis of the results obtained and the pedagogical surveys.

(the presentation of fewer than five selected contributions is not a factor for exclusion)

4.3.3. Criteria for evaluating University Extension Tasks and Economic and Social Valorisation of Knowledge (VTC) – 8%

In assessing quality, and in accordance with the framework that these may have in sub-criteria 4.3.3.1, 4.3.3.2 and 4.3.3.3, special emphasis should be placed on the quality, relevance and contributions related to the 5 (five) projects/works/activities for the economic and social valorisation of knowledge mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most relevant, and candidates should describe the national/international relevance and main contributions of the candidate.

(the presentation of fewer than five selected contributions is not a factor for exclusion)

4.3.3.1. CTC1 - Patents, registration and ownership of rights, drafting of technical standards and legislation

Authorship and co-authorship of patents, registration of intellectual property rights over methodologies, software, algorithms, computational methods and mathematical methods.

Participation in the drafting of legislative projects and technical standards.

4.3.3.2. CTC2 - Consultancy services and research and development contracts

Coordination and participation in consultancy and/or research and development activities involving the business community and the public sector, with candidates highlighting the scientific and technological aspects involved in these activities.

Participation as an expert in panels and evaluation processes for research and technological development projects in companies and/or entities in the scientific and technological system.

Coordination and participation as a trainer in professional training or technological specialisation courses aimed at companies or the public sector.

The evaluation of this criterion should also take into account the economic value of the research results achieved, measured by the development and technology transfer contracts to which they gave rise and the spin-off companies to whose creation they contributed.

4.3.3.3. CTC3 - Dissemination of science and technology

Coordination and participation in scientific and technological dissemination initiatives within the scientific community (e.g., organisation of conferences) and for various audiences.

Scientific and technological dissemination publications.

4.3.4. Criteria for evaluating the Scientific-Pedagogical and Extension Programme (PCP) – 15%

Scientific/pedagogical and extension programme, covering a period of 5 (five) years, in the subject area to which the competition relates and, in particular, in the scientific subarea of Sciences and Technology of Programming (CTP) of DEI and in one or more CTP topics indicated in point 4.2, and the respective means of implementing it. The programme shall be evaluated according to its consistency, feasibility and impact in each of the three areas:

CPD1 – Scientific activity development programme

CPD2 – Pedagogical activity development programme

CPD3 – University extension activity and economic and social valorisation of knowledge development programme

5. Working methodology of the Jury

5.1. Candidate scoring

Each member of the jury makes a reasoned assessment, scoring each candidate in relation to each strand on a scale of 0 to 100 points, taking into account the criteria approved for each strand, with a level of requirement adjusted to the category for which the competition is open.

5.2. Public hearing

The jury has the option of holding public hearings, under equal conditions for all candidates approved on absolute merit, for the purpose of personal clarification of the evaluation elements contained in the documentation submitted by them.

If it is necessary to hold these public hearings, they will take place between the 30th and 70th day following the deadline for submission of applications, and all candidates will be informed by email, at least ten working days in advance, of the date and place where these public hearings will take place.

5.3. Final Result

The Final Result (RF) of the evaluation of each candidate by each member of the jury is calculated using the weighting formula for the various aspects of the curriculum:

RF= (0.65*VMC) + (0.12*VEMP) + (0.08*VTC) + (0.15*VPCP)

which reflects the weights associated with each dimension.

Following the individual assessment, each member of the jury draws up their own ranked list of candidates, which they use to participate in the voting that leads to the decision and final ranking of candidates in accordance with point 4.

5.4. Deliberations of the jury

5.4.1. Any deliberation shall result from Article 17, No 12, of the Regulation, applicable pursuant to Article 83-A of the ECDU, which determined its approval with a view to implementing the rules of that legal instrument, covering the procedural processing of competitions, namely the evaluation and final classification system.

Consequently, under the terms Article 17, No 12, of the aforementioned Regulation, the jury shall deliberate by roll-call vote based on the selection criteria adopted and disclosed for the approval and ranking of candidates, with an absolute majority required for any deliberation and no abstentions permitted.

5.4.2. Ranking methodology

In the various votes, each member of the jury must respect their ranking list, observing the following in the votes:

a) the first vote is intended to determine the candidate placed in 1st place, counting the number of votes each candidate obtained for that place;

b) if a candidate obtains an absolute majority of votes for 1st place, they are placed in that position and removed from the ballot, and the procedure to choose the candidate who will occupy 2nd place begins;

c) if no candidate obtains an absolute majority of votes for first place, a new ballot shall be held, only among the candidates who obtained votes for first place, after removing the candidate with the fewest votes for that place in the previous ballot;

d) if there is a tie between two or more candidates in the least voted position, a tiebreaker vote shall be held only between them, counting the number of first relative positions of each, and the least voted shall be removed;

e) if the tie remains between two or more candidates in the least voted position, but the number of candidates tied in the least voted position has been reduced in relation to the previous round of voting, a new tiebreaker vote shall be held only among the candidates tied in the least voted position, counting the number of relative first positions of each, with the least voted candidate being removed;

f) if there is still a tie between two or more candidates in the lowest-ranked position, without the number of candidates tied in the lowest-ranked position having been reduced in relation to the previous round of voting, the tie shall be broken by the casting vote of the President or by the exercise of the casting vote, as the case may be, and the candidate voted for by the President shall be chosen to participate in the subsequent vote for the same position;

g) if there is a tie when only two or more candidates remain for 1st place, the tie shall be broken by the casting vote of the Chair of the jury or by the exercise of the casting vote, as the case may be;

h) once the candidate for 1st place has been chosen, they are removed from the voting and the procedure for choosing the candidate for 2nd place begins, repeating the process referred to in the previous paragraphs for the subsequent places until a single ranked list of all candidates is obtained.

6. Submission of applications

6.1. Submission of applications

Candidates must access and register on the electronic platform www.apply.up.pt to submit their application, selecting the procedure for which they wish to apply (procedure code: DOCPUB-FEUP-26-15), by the deadline.

6.2. Application requirements:

Applications must be accompanied by the following documents:

a) Documents proving that the conditions set out in paragraph 2 of this notice have been met, namely a doctoral degree certificate, except in cases where the doctoral degree was obtained at the University of Porto. Candidates who are selected for the position to be filled and who hold a doctoral degree obtained abroad must submit the recognition or registration (as applicable) of their degree at the time of signing the contract, in accordance with Decree-Law No. 66/2018, of 16 August, under penalty of exclusion;

b) Curriculum Vitae, containing all information relevant to the evaluation of the application, as well as demonstrating compliance with the criteria set out in point 3 of this notice, taking into account the evaluation and ranking criteria set out in point 4.3. of this notice for the aspects and parameters of the evaluation, namely information relating to scientific publications indexed in the Google Scholar and SCOPUS databases, including citation indicators, excluding self-citations, and the indication of the quartile of each journal in the SJR (SCImago Journal Rank) and the CORE Ranking (ICORE) assigned to each conference. Candidates should structure their CVs in such a way as to facilitate the quick and complete identification of their contribution in the subject area in which the competition is open, in each of the sub-points of point 4.3;

c) A copy of each of the works and proof of the activities mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted, which allow the criteria set out in points 3.4. and 4.3. of this notice to be verified and evaluated;

d) File with selected contributions, indicating the reasons for highlighting these contributions (candidates must add a summary justification of the international scientific importance of each of these articles to the articles submitted): (1) Identification of 5 (five) scientific articles mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted, published in the last 5 (five) years, which candidates consider most representative of their research activity; (2) Identification of 5 (five)  scientific articles mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most representative of their research activity to date; (3) Identification of 5 (five) R&D projects mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most representative, with candidates describing their national/international relevance and main contributions; (4) Identification of 5 (five) works/activities/contributions in relation to teaching material mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most representative, describing their main contributions; (6) Identification of 5 (five) taught courses mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most representative, describing their main contributions; (7) Identification of 5 (five) projects/works/activities of economic and social value of knowledge mentioned in the curriculum vitae submitted that candidates consider most relevant;

e) A file containing the scientific and teaching programme, including university extension activities and the economic and social valorisation of knowledge, describing the research, teaching and university extension activities that the candidate proposes to develop during the first 5 (five) years following their appointment as Assistant Professor, in the field of Informatics Engineering and, in particular, in the DEI scientific subarea of Sciences and Technology of Programming (CTP), and addressing one or more of the topics presented in point 4.2.

The document corresponding to the scientific and teaching programme and university extension activities shall not exceed 10 (ten) A4 pages (Times or Times New Roman font, minimum size 10), with the references section excluded from this page limit.

6.3. Each of the documents listed in point 6.2(c) of the Call for Applications must be submitted as a separate file and in full on the Apply platform. 

6.4.For the purposes of assessing applications, no documents accessed via links will be considered, with the exception of those referring to publications with a DOI.

6.5. The documents mentioned in point 6.2. should preferably be submitted in a non-editable format.

6.6. Failure to comply with the provisions of 6.1. will result in the exclusion of the application.

6.7. Failure to submit or late submission of the documents referred to in points a) to e) of 6.2. will result in the application not being accepted.

7. Notifications and hearing of interested parties

7.1. The Human Resources Department of the Centre for Resources and Common Services of the University of Porto will notify candidates of the decision on their administrative admission or non-admission to the competition, which will be based on compliance or non-compliance with the requirements of current legislation and paragraph 2 of this notice, and the conditions established for the application referred to in paragraph 6.2. 

7.2. A hearing shall be held for interested parties, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 121 and 122 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, for candidates who have not been admitted administratively, those who have not been approved on absolute merit, and candidates ranked on the list of candidates who are not eligible for the position being advertised. All candidates shall be notified of the approval of the jury's final decision.

7.3. Notifications are made by publishing on the Apply UP electronic platform, under the terms of paragraph c) of no. 1 of article 112 of the CPA, producing their effects under the terms of article 113 of the CPA.

Candidates have ten working days to respond in writing.

8. Composition of the Jury

Chair:

Dr. Rui Artur Bartolo Calçada, Director and Full Professor, Faculdade de Engenharia, Universidade do Porto, acting under the authority delegated by order no. 4468/2026, published in the Diário da República, 2nd series, no. 66 of 6 May 2026.

Members:

Dr. Luís Manuel Marques da Costa Caires, Full Professor, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa;

Dr. Carla Maria Gonçalves Ferreira, Full Professor, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa;

Dr. Simão Patrício Melo de Sousa, Full Professor, Universidade do Algarve;

Dr. João Carlos Pascoal Faria, Full Professor, Faculdade de Engenharia, Universidade do Porto;

Dr. Pedro Nuno Ferreira da Rosa da Cruz Diniz, Full Professor, Faculdade de Engenharia, Universidade do Porto.

9. Other provisions

Joint Order No. 373/2000, of 31 March, of the Minister for State Reform and Public Administration and the Minister for Equality, stipulates that the following statement must be included in entrance and access competitions:

‘In compliance with Article 9, h), of the Constitution, the Public Administration, as an employer, actively promotes a policy of equal opportunities between men and women in access to employment and career progression, taking scrupulous measures to avoid any and all forms of discrimination.’ 

In this regard, the terms ‘candidate(s)’, ‘teacher(s)’ and other similar terms are not used in this notice to refer to the gender of individuals.

Similarly, no candidate may be privileged, benefited, prejudiced or deprived of any right or exempt from any duty on the grounds of, namely, ancestry, age, sexual orientation, marital status, family situation, economic situation, education, origin or social status, genetic heritage, reduced working capacity, disability, chronic illness, nationality, ethnic origin or race, territory of origin, language, religion, political or ideological beliefs, and trade union membership.

The Vice-Rector, Professor José Manuel Pereira Dias de Castro Lopes, 6 of May 2026