Scoring criteria and rubrics
Each event can define scoring criteria that judges use to evaluate projects. Criteria are the dimensions on which projects are scored — for example, innovation, technical execution, presentation quality, or impact.| Setting | Description |
|---|---|
| Criteria name | The dimension being scored (e.g., “Innovation”, “Technical Complexity”) |
| Description | Guidance for judges on what this criterion measures |
| Weight | Relative importance of this criterion when calculating the overall score (when category weighting is enabled) |
Category weighting
When category weighting is enabled, each criterion has a weight that determines how much it contributes to the project’s overall score. For example:| Criterion | Weight | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Innovation | 30% | Heavily influences the total score |
| Technical Execution | 40% | Most influential criterion |
| Presentation | 15% | Moderate influence |
| Impact | 15% | Moderate influence |
When category weighting is disabled, all criteria contribute equally to the overall score.
How judges score
Within their assigned judging group, judges evaluate each project by:- Reviewing the project — reading the description, GitHub link, demo description, and technologies used
- Scoring each criterion — assigning a numeric score for each defined criterion
- Adding notes — providing optional written feedback about the project
Viewing scores
The Judge Votes tab displays:| Column | Description |
|---|---|
| Project | The project being scored |
| Judge | The judge who submitted the score |
| Round | Which judging round the score belongs to |
| Criteria scores | Individual scores for each criterion |
| Overall score | Aggregated score (weighted or unweighted depending on configuration) |
| Notes | Judge’s written feedback on the project |
Score aggregation
Project scores are aggregated across all judges in a group:- Each judge’s scores for a project are combined per criterion
- If category weighting is enabled, criteria scores are multiplied by their weight
- The final project score for a round is the average of all judge scores in the group
Round progression
For multi-round tournaments, you advance top-scoring projects from one round to the next:Review round results
After all judges in a round have completed scoring, review the leaderboard to see project rankings for that round.
Select advancing projects
Choose which projects advance to the next round. Typically this is the top N projects by score.
Assign to next round groups
Add the advancing projects to judging groups in the next round. Use auto-balancing to distribute them evenly.
Late submission tracking
The system tracks whether projects were submitted after the official deadline. Late submissions are flagged so judges and managers can factor timeliness into their evaluation if desired.Next steps
Leaderboard
View real-time rankings and score breakdowns.
Judges
Manage judge assignments and groups.
Community Voting
Enable attendee voting alongside judge scoring.