B

Festival Submission Auto-Judge

3.15

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Public data utilization island expo
→
Step 2 Competition judging process
→
Step 3 Automated submission evaluation and comparison SaaS for judges

Problem

When local government competition judges (5-10 people) manually evaluate 30-100 submissions, score discrepancies arise from differing interpretations of judging criteria, and the review process takes 2-3 days. When transparency issues trigger appeals, additional administrative costs of 500,000-1,000,000 KRW (~$375-$750) per case are incurred.

Solution

Automatically performs first-round evaluation of submissions using structured rubrics for data utilization, completeness, and creativity, while visualizing score variance among judges in real time. When appeals are filed, an audit trail report with scoring rationale is automatically generated.

Target: Local government festival and competition operations departments (running 3+ competitions per year), public institution innovation officers
Revenue Model: Per Transaction billing: 500,000 KRW (~$375) per competition (based on 50 submissions), additional submissions at 5,000 KRW (~$3.75) each
Ecosystem Role: Infrastructure
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
3.0/5
U Urgency
3.0/5
M Market
2.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
3.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (74%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
24.4/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (57/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
9.4/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
10.5/15
Solo Buildability
5.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Backend [medium] AI/ML [medium] Frontend [low]
Dashboard