The quality contract
The NeuroBridge Standard
- 01
Two days, in person
Day one is team formation and building, and ends with the pitch deck deadline. Day two is judged: the first round in the morning, the final and the awards in the afternoon. No remote-only editions — the format depends on the room.
- 02
Teams of one to five
You can enter alone or bring up to four other people. Teams form before or during day one, and five is the ceiling, not a target.
- 03
The same hundred points
Value for the user 25, prototype and use of AI 30, quality testing 20, feasibility 15, originality 10. Published before registration opens, identical in every city.
- 04
Two rounds, never one
Every project is read in a first round against the card, then the finalists are rescored from scratch by a human jury. How the first round is read is the edition’s choice — Baku has GPT and Claude do it live on stage. A single round cannot be compared across cities.
- 05
Mandatory disclosure
Every submission names the models, data and components it used. Libraries and public templates are allowed when disclosed; previously built products are not eligible.
- 06
Quality testing is scored
Twenty of the hundred points are for how a team checked its own work. A project with honest failures outscores one with a prettier demo and no evidence.
- 07
Written feedback to every team
Not only the winners. A judge cannot record a score without writing what was strong and what to change, and the team sees it.
- 08
Conflicts declared, not managed quietly
A judge connected to a team declares it in one click. The score is excluded from the average and the organiser appoints a replacement.
The card
One hundred points, five criteria, fixed weights. Identical in the group rooms and in the final, and identical in every city.
| Points | Criterion | What judges assess |
|---|---|---|
| 25 | Value for the user | A specific problem and a clear outcome from solving it. |
| 30 | Prototype and use of AI | A working core scenario, and what AI actually contributes to the result. |
| 20 | Quality testing | Tests, examples of failures, and comparison with the current approach. |
| 15 | Feasibility | Data requirements, running costs and a clear next step. |
| 10 | Originality | A meaningful difference from common solutions. |
Quality testing and feasibility together are worth 35 — more than the prototype itself. That is deliberate. A two-day AI demo is easy to make impressive and hard to make honest, and the gap between the two is where the scoring weight sits.
Three ways an edition runs
The standard is identical in all three. What changes is who delivers it and who pays.
Run by Starnest Academy
- Who delivers
- The network team delivers it end to end.
- Use when
- Founding editions and any first edition in a new region.
Highest control, highest cost. Does not scale past a handful a year.
Licensed to a local host
- Who delivers
- A university, hub or community runs it, with a lead judge from the network.
- Use when
- Repeat cities and markets with an existing community.
The mode that makes this a network rather than a touring event.
White-label for a client
- Who delivers
- Delivered for a ministry, corporate or university on their brief.
- Use when
- Sovereign AI programmes and corporate innovation.
Same card, same rounds. The client brands it; the standard still applies.
What the standard is actually for
So scores travel
So licensing does not rot it