AUHack 2024

Expo

After hacking ends all teams will expo their projects. Here judges and fellow students will have time to test each other's projects. The expo will be at your tables where you have worked throughout the weekend.
Each team will be visited once by our three knowledgeable judges within a time interval of 2 hours. As soon as all groups and their cases have been registered, a plan for when you will be visited by the judges will be made public. Thus you will have some time to eat lunch and watch other hacks when the judges are not at your table. But be sure to be at your table a little before it says on the plan!

Best Hack Criteria

Technical Difficulty

How technically impressive was the hack? Was the technical problem the team tackled difficult? Did it use a particularly clever technique or did it use many different components? Did the technology involved make you go "Wow"?

Originality

Was the hack unique and interesting? Is it something that has never been seen before? This can range from a new spin on a known idea to completely outlandish ideas.

Polish

Did the hack both look and work beautifully? Have all bugs been squashed? The closer it looks and feels to a professional-grade application, the better.

Usefulness

Was the hack useful? Was it intuitive and easy to use? Doesn't have to be business-ready, but should have the potential to be useful in everyday life.

Bonus: Learning

Did the team stretch themselves? Did they try to learn something new? What kind of projects have they worked on before? If a team which always does virtual reality projects switch up and try doing a mobile app instead, that exploration should be rewarded.

Facepalm Criteria

Originality

The hack or the idea behind it should be unique and interesting. This can range from new and crazy spins on known ideas to completely outlandish ideas.

Funny

The hack is obviously a testament to what the human mind can do to make something funny, be it a genius pun or something that just makes you laugh.

Unusefulness

The hack doesn't have to be useful or meaningful in any sense.

Judges

Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose

Clemens has been an associate professor at Aarhus University since 2016. His specialties are Graphical User Interfaces and Human-Computer Interaction.

Michael Wessely

Michael is also an associate professor at Aarhus University. He specialises in Human-Computer Interaction with a focus on physical interfaces made out of different materials and the fabrication of these interfaces.

Henrik Bærbak Christensen

Henrik has been at the Computer Science department for just about 30 years as an associate professor. His field of interest is software architecture, software engineering and the fantastic world of developing reliable and maintainable (beautiful!) code.
I am a coder at heart - so I have joined AUHack as a judge to see awesome systems made from awesome code.

Evaluation Plan

DeiC Case

Evaluation number	Group number	Group name	Evaluation start	Evaluation end
1	Group 2	De voldsomme vildgnuer	12:15	12:20
2	Group 6	Schlobbers	12:20	12:25
3	Group 9	Wizzards	12:25	12:30
4	Group 12	Biominds	12:30	12:35
5	Group 22	Databanden	12:35	12:40
6	Group 27	Smørklatten	12:40	12:45

AUHack Case

Evaluation number	Group number	Group name	Evaluation start	Evaluation end
7	Group 1	Blabble	12:55	13:00
8	Group 3	Questionable Research, Doubtful Conclusions	13:00	13:05
9	Group 7	That group se7en	13:05	13:10
10	Group 10	Deadlock Disciples	13:10	13:15
11	Group 25	Open Sesame	13:15	13:20
12	Group 28	Class Meter	13:20	13:25
13	Group 29	S P A C E	13:25	13:30
14	Group 30	The pasta pálika paella squad	13:30	13:35
15	Group 31	KSDH*	13:35	13:40

Rogue Case

Evaluation number	Group number	Group name	Evaluation start	Evaluation end
16	Group 14	HFPH	13:50	13:55
17	Group 19	ALPHA Sigmas	13:55	14:00