CGU Hackathon: Judging Rubric

Instructions for Judges: Review each category below and use the score guide (1 = Poor, 5 = Excellent) for each team. Consider both the clarity and depth of the solution, its impact, and the way it is presented.
Criteria Weight What to Assess Score Guide
Socially Responsible Impact in Innovation 20% Solution addresses a problem that impacts real people.
Solution demonstrates and specifies responsible intent across target end users.
Solution addresses people who are traditionally forgotten, marginalized, or blocked by this kind of technology.
1: Poor
2: Below Average
3: Average
4: Good
5: Excellent
Ease of Use, Transparency, and Explainability 20% Solution features clarity and insightfulness of visual outputs (i.e., user interface, maps).
Solutions are clear and accessible to end users.
Users can follow the reasoning or logic behind AI-provided answers, avoiding unexplainable behavior.
1: Poor
2: Below Average
3: Average
4: Good
5: Excellent
Use of Innovative Technology and Intelligent Adaptation 20% Design of AI system is original and adaptable to realistic use cases.
Solutions developed by prompted or pre-trained AI models have high impact on described problem.
Pre-trained GeoAI models precisely and correctly use spatial or contextual analysis.
1: Poor
2: Below Average
3: Average
4: Good
5: Excellent
User Safety and Trust 20% User trust and safety is centered throughout the experience, proactively securing users’ information.
Solution provides explicit disclosures alerting users of ethical risks, potential unintended consequences, and misuse.
Solution is tested to demonstrate trustworthy handling of users’ information.
1: Poor
2: Below Average
3: Average
4: Good
5: Excellent
Presentation and Storytelling 20% Team presentation communicates clarity of vision, project structure, and design logic.
Team members showcase storytelling that is engaging to the audience.
Presenters showcase ability to perform ethical thinking.
1: Poor
2: Below Average
3: Average
4: Good
5: Excellent