AI Innovation Challenge
AI Innovation Challenge Rules and Rubric
RULES:
Team Formation
Teams can have 2-5 core members (plus mentors/advisors). At least 2 members must be undergraduates.
Health Impact track teams must also have at least 1 faculty or graduate student member.
Storytelling/Entertainment and Student Experience tracks are encouraged but not required to have faculty/graduate students.
Teams are encouraged to be interdisciplinary and inclusive.
Teams must be submitted by 11:59 pm on Wednesday, October 25.
Project Ideas
Projects should aim to address one of the 3 challenge tracks using AI technology.
Projects can build on existing ideas/research but should offer something new/innovative.
Video Pitches
Teams will submit a 5-minute (or less) video pitch after the kickoff workshops.
15 (5 from each of the three tracks) teams will be selected from the video pitch round to advance to the Finals.
Finals
The top 15 teams will pitch in person at the Finals on January 12, 2024, with a 7-minute pitch.
There will be three winners in each track.
Teams will be evaluated on their problem definition, proposed solution, innovation, feasibility, potential impact, pitch quality, and team capabilities.
Prizes
$51,000 in total prizes
Top 3 teams in each track receive prizes (1st place =$10k, 2nd place= $5k, and 3rd place =$2k)
Code of Ethics
Respect teammates and other participants
Foster an inclusive team environment
Uphold academic honesty and integrity
Be supportive of others
Have fun!
RUBRIC
| Criteria | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Problem Definition | Problem is vague or poorly defined. No metrics specified. | Problem lacks clarity. Metrics loosely defined. | Problem and metrics are adequately defined. | Problem and metrics clearly defined. | Problem and metrics very clearly defined. |
| Innovation | Solution is not inventive or novel. | Small innovation that slightly improves on existing solutions. | Moderate innovation that goes beyond existing solutions. | Significant innovation that disrupts current approaches. | Highly inventive. Transformative innovation. |
| Feasibility | Not technically or commercially feasible. Major flaws. | Feasible but with some technical and business concerns. | Feasible with minor technical and business risks. | Technically and commercially feasible with robust plan. | Highly feasible technically and commercially. |
| Impact Potential | Minimal or no impact. Does not address critical issue. | Small impact in limited area. | Good potential for solid impact. | Significant impact in important area. | Transformative impact in critical area. |
| Presentation Quality | Unclear, disorganized, lacking persuasiveness. | Basic pitch lacking clarity and persuasive flow. | Logical pitch with some engagement. Visuals ok. | Clear, logical, persuasive pitch. Visuals effective. | Extremely clear, compelling and persuasive pitch. Visuals excel. |
| Team Capabilities | Team lacks relevant skills or cohesiveness. | Team has some useful skills but limited experience. | Team has good skills and experience. | Team has excellent skills and experience. | Team has outstanding skills, experience and chemistry. |