Judging

From 2008.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)

Revision as of 17:38, 3 May 2008

[Note: All Awards & Judging Criteria for iGEM 2008 are currently in draft form. The Awards & Judging details will be finalized by 1 June 2008. Please send any comments or suggestions for awards and judging by email to judging@igem.org. For example, if you anticipate that your team will do something amazing or important, but that such a project would not be recognized via any of the mechanisms or awards below, let us know as soon as possible.]

Register the team, have a great summer, and have fun attending the Jamboree.
Create and share a Description of the team's project via the iGEM wiki.
Present a Poster and Talk at the iGEM Jamboree.
Enter information detailing at least one new standard BioBrick Part or Device in the Registry of Parts
- Entered information for each new part or device should at least include primary nucleic acid sequence, description of function, authorship, any relevant safety notes, and an acknowledgement of sources and references.
- Teams are expected to design and contribute standard biological parts that conform to the public definition of BioBrick standard biological parts. Non-BioBrick parts will not be recognized by the iGEM judges. However, if during the summer you invent a new and improved standard for defining and assembling BioBrick parts, and you would like to freely share this new standard with the world, then you can declare that you have invented a new standard, contribute parts or devices based on your new standard, and the judges will consider your new parts or devices, taking into account your new proposed technical standard. A written description of the new proposed technical standard must be included in your project Description, and should also be sent to the technical standards mailing list at the BioBricks Foundation for discussion (standards@biobricks.org).
- Any new Devices that are based on gene expression are expected to conform to the PoPS device boundary standard. See chapter 3 of the book, [http://openwetware.org/wiki/Adventures Adventures in Synthetic Biology], for more information about common signal carriers and PoPS.
Submit DNA for at least one new BioBrick Part or Device to the Registry of Parts.
- The submitted DNA must be associated with a Part or Device for which you have entered information describing the part or device, and must conform to the BioBrick standards for Parts or Devices (see above).

The requirements to earn a Silver Medal, in addition to the Bronze Medal requirements, are:

Demonstrate that at least one new BioBrick Part or Device of your own design and construction works as expected.
Characterize the operation of at least one new BioBrick Part or Device and enter this information on the Parts or Device page via the Registry of Parts.

The requirements to earn a Gold Medal, in addition to the Silver Medal requirements, are any one OR more of the following:

Characterize or improve an existing BioBrick Part or Device that was distributed via the 2008 iGEM BioBrick Parts collection, and enter this information back on the Registry.
Help another iGEM team by, for example, charactering a part, debugging a construct, or modeling or simulating their system.
Develop and document a new technical standard that supports the (i) design of BioBrick Parts or Devices, or (ii) construction of BioBrick Parts or Devices, or (iii) characterization of BioBrick Parts or Devices, or (iv) analysis, modeling, and simulation of BioBrick Parts or Devices, or (v) sharing BioBrick Parts or Devices, either via physical DNA or as information via the internet.
Outline and detail a new approach to an issue of Human Practice in synthetic biology as it relates to your project, such as safety, security, ethics, or ownership, sharing, and innovation.

Grand Prizes

A small number of iGEM teams (between 3-10 teams) will be selected by the judges as iGEM Finalists. These teams will be selected based on the overall excellence of their entire project, from choice of project, to new Parts and Devices, to the quality of the Project Description, Poster, and Presentation, to the success and impact of the project, to consideration of issues of Human Practice, and so on.

A grand prize, first runner-up, and second runner-up will be selected by all the judges from the pool of iGEM Finalists.

Special Prizes

iGEM 2008 hopes to award the following Special prizes, conditional on the accomplishments presented by the teams. Each prize will be awarded at the discretion of the judges. Below are brief descriptions for each Special prize:

Best New BioBrick Part, Natural
- Most genetically-encoded functions have not yet been converted to BioBrick parts. In fact, most genes in the natural environment have likely not ever been sequenced. Thus, there are *many* opportunities to find new, cool, and important genetically encoded functions, and refine and convert the DNA encoding these functions into BioBrick standard biological parts. For example, in 2007, the Melbourne team engineered [http://parts.mit.edu/registry/index.php/Part:BBa_I750016 BBa_I750016], a tiny protein balloon that can be used to adjust the buoyancy of bacteria. What else is out there?
Best New BioBrick Device, Engineered
- New BioBrick Devices can be made by combining existing BioBrick Parts. For example, Inverters, Amplifier, Smell Generators, Protein Balloon Generators, Senders, Receiver, Actuators, and so on. What cool or important new Devices can you assemble from existing BioBrick Parts?
Best Human Practices Advance
- Issues? We've got issues! How will you sell your project if you have to give away the parts? What does your family think about your genetic engineering dreams? Will the world be a safe place if we make biology easy to engineer? How do the lessons of the past inform everybody's discussion going forward? Find a new way to help human civilization consider, guide, and address the impacts of ongoing advances in biotechnology.
Best Experimental Measurement
- There are a lot of exciting Parts in the Registry, but most of the Parts have never been characterized. Can you make a great measurement for one new Parts? Or, can you develop and implement a new method for characterizing thousands of parts? Go for it!
Best Model
- Parts and Devices have a lot of details, too many to think about all the time, in fact. Models provide a great way to describe the functioning and operation of Parts and Devices. Show everybody what you can do!
Best Software Tool
- Computers have been around for a long time. How come we don't have more, great software tools for helping everything engineering synthetic biological systems based on standard biological parts? Cadence, Synopsis, Microsoft, Google, will these names mean anything to the future of synthetic biology? Or, will you add a new name at the top of the heap? It's up to you.
Best New Standard
- There's so much work to do in making biology easy to engineer. If we could easily share and build on each other's work, then we could all do so much more. Standards help to make sharing easier. For example, the BioBrick standard for physical assembly of BioBrick parts makes it easier to design and construct parts that can be readily assembled with the parts that everybody else is making. What other sorts of standards do we need? How about standards for measurements? How about standards for different types of parts (for example, what about a standard BioBrick promoter, with a fixed transcription start site? Or, how about a standard phosphorylation motif, for post-translational devices? Or, how about a standard signal carrier for biosynthetic devices? Or, how about a standard model for a class of BioBrick Devices? Or, how about a standard for sharing information about parts across computer networks?). You get the idea.
Best Wiki
- The project Descriptions on the iGEM website provide a great resource for future iGEM students and teams, as well as the rest of the world, so that everybody can see what iGEM is about. For example, check out this Description from the 2007 UC Berkeley iGEM team, [http://parts.mit.edu/igem07/index.php/Berkeley_UC Bactoblood]. Wow! Can you do better?
Best Poster
- Posters are a great way to concisely present your team's work. You can bring your poster to the Jamboree, but also to other meetings and conferences as well. Print out a second copy and post it at your home school so that everybody in your department or school can learn about your team. Show us what you've got.
Best Presentation
- At the end of the day, many people learn best by watching and listening. Online video also provides a wonderful legacy to help others, from students, to teachers, to the general publics. Giving a great presentation is a challenge, and benefits greatly from practice and study.

Area Prizes

Software Tools

Complaints

To file an official complaint regarding iGEM 2008 judging you must send an email to complaints@igem.org. Your email should include your full name, the name of your school and team, and the name and email address of your faculty advisor. Your email must also be copied to your faculty advisor. In your email please clearly state your complaint and what you hope will happen as a result of filing your official complaint. The iGEM judging committee will work to respond to all complaints as quickly as possible. Complaints that are sent to other addresses, or that do not include the requested information will be ignored.

Please see the Judging page to study the detailed requirements for each type of Area or Special prize.

iGEM 2008 also hopes to award the following Area prizes, conditional on the accomplishments presented by the teams:

Best Food or Energy Project
Best Environment Project
Best Health or Medicine Project
Best Manufacturing Project
Best New Application Area
Best Foundational Advance

Please see the Judging page to study the detailed requirements for each type of Area prize.

@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 **Computers have been around for a long time.  How come we don't have more, great software tools for helping everything engineering synthetic biological systems based on standard biological parts?  Cadence, Synopsis, Microsoft, Google, will these names mean anything to the future of synthetic biology?  Or, will you add a new name at the top of the heap?  It's up to you.
 *Best New Standard
-**foo
+**There's so much work to do in making biology easy to engineer.  If we could easily share and build on each other's work, then we could all do so much more.  Standards help to make sharing easier.  For example, the BioBrick standard for physical assembly of BioBrick parts makes it easier to design and construct parts that can be readily assembled with the parts that everybody else is making.  What other sorts of standards do we need?  How about standards for measurements?  How about standards for different types of parts (for example, what about a standard BioBrick promoter, with a fixed transcription start site? Or, how about a standard phosphorylation motif, for post-translational devices?  Or, how about a standard signal carrier for biosynthetic devices? Or, how about a standard model for a class of BioBrick Devices?  Or, how about a standard for sharing information about parts across computer networks?).  You get the idea.
 *Best Wiki
 **The project Descriptions on the iGEM website provide a great resource for future iGEM students and teams, as well as the rest of the world, so that everybody can see what iGEM is about. For example, check out this Description from the 2007 UC Berkeley iGEM team, [http://parts.mit.edu/igem07/index.php/Berkeley_UC Bactoblood].  Wow!  Can you do better?