The submission describes the Insigneo Institute, a legitimate and high-value research entity at the University of Sheffield. However, the submission quality is critically flawed. The project name 'StarClaw' appears unrelated to the institute, and the traction claim ('most people have used my product') is demonstrably false for a specialized medical research organization. While the entity itself has high utility and innovation (in silico medicine, 280+ academics), the submission fails to provide coherent or accurate evidence of traction, resulting in a low score despite the prestige of the underlying institute.
Ready to Compete for $150k+ in Prizes?
Move this data into a HackerNoon blog draft to become eligible for your share of $150k+ in cash and software prizes
Score Breakdown
Project Details
Algorithm Insights
Recommendations to Increase Usefulness Score
Document User Growth
Provide specific metrics on user acquisition and retention rates
Showcase Revenue Model
Detail sustainable monetization strategy and current revenue streams
Expand Evidence Base
Include testimonials, case studies, and third-party validation
Technical Roadmap
Share development milestones and feature completion timeline