The first group to present to the jury.
The jury is made up of well-known professors, doctors in the Vietnamese IT industry. The jury of potential market products consists of Doctor Nguyen Minh Dan, Major General cum Doctor Nguyen Viet The, Associate Professor cum Doctor Duong Anh Duc, Doctor Phung Van On, Doctor Nguyen Sy Hue. The jury of existing market products includes Professor Nguyen Van Hieu (Head of the Jury), Doctor Tran Duc Lai, Doctor Nguyen Long, Doctor Hoang Le Minh, Associate Professor cum Doctor Luong Chi Mai, Vice Chairman of Hanoi Informatics & Telecommunication Association Le Hong Ha, Associate Professor cum Doctor Huynh Quyet Thang and Doctor Hoang Minh.
The jury focused on strong points and practical application of products presented by candidates.
In terms of existing market products, the jury questioned inventors about comparisons between their products and the same kind of products which are used in the market. They also were analysing product inovation. There was a puzzle about the time efficiency when using their software. It will take some time to implement works with their software.
It was difficult for candidates to give persuasive evidence of product application when they were asked. It’s easier for them to convince the jury by giving users’ assessments of their products.
The judging board paid attention to safety, searching possibilities and connection of products. The questions were about database, safety and validity.
The Q&A session on potential market products was exciting as well. The jury queried how to complete products and apply them in practice. Copyright was a focus of jury inquiry because many products are made by groups or companies.
The jury was concerned about the database’s validity and accuracy and how possible it would be to check against the original database if anything went wrong. This issue made the question period of the last product very interesting. They also exchanged questions to clarify the issues.
The board appraised many ideas of these groups. They also noted that inventors need to have a more systematic vision and recheck algorithms to deal with errors, if any.
