Judging/Rubric categories
Project
- How impressive is this project?
- How creative or novel is the teams project?
- Did the project work?
- How much did the team accomplish?
- Is the project likely to have an impact?
- How well are engineering and design principles used?
- How thoughtful and thorough was the team's consideration of human practices?
- How complete is the team's effort to attribute work?
Track Specific
Track Specific - Standard Tracks
- Did the team design a project based on synthetic biology and standard parts?
- Are the parts functions and behaviors well-documented in the Registry?
Track Specific - Art & Design
- How compelling was the project installation in the art & design exhibition space?
- How well did the project address potential applications or implications of synthetic biology?
Track Specific - Community Labs
- Did the team design a project based on synthetic biology?
- Did the team interact with another iGEM team either through a collaboration or a mentoring relationship?
Track Specific - Hardware
- Did the team demonstrate utility and functionality in their hardware prototype?
- Is the documentation of the hardware system (design files, bill of materials, assembly instructions and/or software) sufficient to enable reproduction by other teams?
Track Specific - High School
- Did the team design a project based on synthetic biology and standard parts?
- Did the team interact with another iGEM team either through a collaboration or a mentoring relationship?
Track Specific - Measurement
- Is the team's measurement protocol likely to be of use to the synthetic biology community?
- Is the protocol well-documented, including the parts functions and behaviors in the registry?
Track Specific - Software
- How useful is the software to the synthetic biology community?
- Is the software designed to be extended and modified by other developers?
Special Prizes
Wiki
- Do I understand what the team accomplished?
- Is the wiki attractive and easy to navigate?
- Does the team provide convincing evidence to support their conclusions?
- How complete is the team's effort to attribute work?
- Will the wiki be a compelling record of the team's project for future teams?
Poster
- Clarity: Could you follow the poster flow?
- How professional is the graphic design in terms of layout and composition?
- Did you find the poster appealing?
- How complete is the team's effort to attribute work?
- How competent were the team at answering questions?
Integrated Human Practices
Education and Public Engagement
Model
- How impressive is the mathematical modeling?
- Did the model help the team understand their device?
- Did the team use measurements of the device to develop the model?
- Does the modeling approach provide a good example for others?
Innovation in Measurement
- Is the measurement potentially repeatable?
- Is the protocol well described?
- Are there web-based support materials?
- Is it useful to other projects?
- Was a standard reference sample included?
Supporting Entrepreneurship
- Customer Discovery - Has the team interviewed a representative number of potential customers for the technology and clearly communicated what they learned?
- Based on their interviews, does the team have a clear hypothesis describing their customers' needs?
- Does the team present a convincing case that their product meets the customers' needs?
- Has the team demonstrated a minimum viable (MVP) product and had customers to commit (LOI, etc.) to purchasing it / using it?
- Does the team have a viable and understood business model/value proposition to take their company to market?
Applied Design
- How well did the project address potential applications and implications of synthetic biology?
- How creative, original, and compelling was the project?
- How impressive was the project installation in the art & design exhibition space?
- How well did the team engage in collaboration with people outside their primary fields?
Supporting Software
- How well is the software using and supporting existing synthetic biology standards and platforms?
- Was this software validated by experimental work?
- Did the team use non-trivial algorithms or designs?
- How easily can others embed this software in new workflows?
- How user-friendly is the software?
New Basic Part
- How does the documentation compare to BBa_K863006 and BBa_K863001?
- How new/ innovative is it?
- Did the team show that it works as expected?
- Is it useful to the community?
New Composite Part
- How does the documentation compare to BBa_K404122 and BBa_K863005?
- How new/innovative is it?
- Did the team show that it works as expected?
- Is it useful to the community?
Part Collection