Looking at one of the big players, the NIH: They already placed a new limit of six grant proposals per PI per year, but that's pretty high. Certainly high enoug

Looking at one of the big players, the NIH: They already placed a new limit of six grant proposals per PI per year, but that's pretty high. Certainly high enough for reviewers to be totally swamped if even 5% of labs who would have otherwise submitted a single proposal use AI to play the numbers game and submit the max of six. If the NIH responds by globally lowering the limit to two or three proposals per year, they hurt 1%er mega labs that expect to have several active grants and now need to bat web above .500 to stay afloat. So I think it's likely that we see elitist criteria as you said, maybe a sliding scale for the proposal limit where labs that currently draw large amounts of funding are allowed to submit more proposals than smaller labs. One place this may end up is with grant proposals requiring a live presentation component. You can use AI to crank out six proposals in a day, but rehearsing and practicing six presentations will still take quite some time and effort.