Kript10
The product is interactive learning platform. User: The teachers who have several classes and degrees to teach or guide for learning. Also, people who want to learn new things can also be users. Problem: It usually takes too much time to create interactive materials for easy understanding of students. For the second case, sometimes we don't find the exact course or materials to learn new things quickly and with fun.
Preliminary score
- Value for the user10.0 / 25
A specific problem and a clear outcome from solving it.
- Prototype and use of AI4.0 / 30
A working core scenario, and what AI actually contributes to the result.
- Quality testing1.5 / 20
Tests, examples of failures, and comparison with the current approach.
- Feasibility2.5 / 15
Data requirements, running costs and a clear next step.
- Originality2.0 / 10
A meaningful difference from common solutions.
What the judges wrote
- GPT-6 AstraPreliminary22/100
- Strengths
- Your submission identifies a concrete teacher pain point: the time needed to prepare interactive learning materials. Your guest-mode instructions and warning about the hosting cold start provide a clear route for trying the published course materials.
- To improve
- Your current submission explicitly has no AI connection; demonstrate a complete workflow from a teacher’s lesson brief to an editable, published interactive lesson. Your testing should document actual generated lessons, specific failures in accuracy or interactivity, and preparation time compared with the teacher’s current approach. Your feasibility plan should identify source materials, the model you will use, estimated cost per lesson, and a small teacher pilot as the next step.
- Claude Opus 5.5Preliminary18/100
- Strengths
- Your team picked a real pain point: teachers covering several classes and levels spend a lot of time building interactive materials. You also deployed a live demo with a guest mode and published courses, which gives judges something concrete to open. Your note that AI-generated lessons can be shallow, repetitive or light on interactive elements is an honest starting point for testing.
- To improve
- Your submission states the platform has no AI connection yet, so the core AI contribution is missing; show AI generating a lesson end to end, from a teacher's topic to a published interactive module. Your testing comment describes AI lesson problems, but the platform has no AI, so add real test cases, such as ten topics generated, how many were usable, and how long a teacher takes today versus with your tool. Address feasibility by naming the model, an estimated cost per lesson, and a concrete next step such as a pilot with one school. Also tie the project to the Enterprise track by naming one organisational workflow, such as corporate onboarding or school-wide curriculum preparation, and the metric that would justify adopting it.
The team
Gunel Jafarova
developer
Nurlan Sharafkhanov
developer
Jannat SamadovLead
product