The Ministry of Science and Technology (MST), which oversees funding for science research, refuted allegations by two scholars that the system used to fund research projects in China is "corrupted" and has hindered innovation.

A spokesman at the ministry said at a news conference Monday that from the application process to the final decision, all candidates for research projects are treated the same and that the government uses the same internationally recognized process. He also said the process is supervised by a panel of experts and scholars.

"We believe this is not consistent with the truth," the spokesperson said, referring to some of the accusations in the article published in the US and translated into Chinese on the Internet.

Shi Yigong and Rao Yi, two Chinese scholars who returned from overseas to teach at Tsinghua University and Peking University, wrote "China's Research Culture" for the US-based magazine Science in September.

The article said applicants for some major research projects in China must have good connections with authorities and with experts on the panel and that the research capability of an institution is not always the main criteria.

They pointed out that the problem is particularly severe when it comes to mega projects involving grants of up to 10 billion yuan ($1.5 billion).

It said that these projects are usually predetermined by officials and friends and peers of those in the judging panel turn out to be bidders for the projects.

The article was later translated into Chinese and widely reprinted in Chinese publica-tions.

In addition to defending the distribution system, the spokesman also pointed out that both authors received "generous" funds to lead two separate national-level science projects.

Shi, 43, was a professor of molecular biology at Princeton University while Rao, 47, was a professor of biology at Northwestern University before he returned to China in 2007.

Both scholars could not be reached for comment, but Rao told Beijing-based China Youth Daily that some domestic institutions tried to keep them away from the research circle and that they have enjoyed more support after their article was published.