Public voting measures each nominee’s public value, clarity and relevance. The result of this stage is added to the final evaluation and is considered by the Jury and the Expert Council, but it does not independently determine whether a nominee enters the shortlist.
The average score of each stage is calculated separately. In open nominations, the public voting average, the Jury average and the Expert Council average are added together. If scores are tied, the Expert Council makes the final decision with a written justification.
Nominations
The ZƏKA Award is presented in five main nominations. The application form is open only for the first four nominations. The fifth nomination — Tech Xəbər Seçimi — is conducted as an editorial selection.
AI solutions in public services, public administration, citizen services and digital transformation.
AI applications that create value in the corporate sector, business processes, customer experience, productivity and commercial results.
Startups with a scalable and innovative AI product or platform that creates a new market opportunity.
Individual creators and teams creating content, media, design, education, social platform or creative products with AI tools.
There is no open application for this nomination. Candidates are nominated directly by the editorial team, do not go through public voting, but are evaluated by the Jury and the Expert Council.
A participant must submit the same project only under the logically relevant nomination. The Organizing Committee may clarify the nomination during the eligibility review.
Official timeline
The process is conducted sequentially: application intake, eligibility review, public voting, jury evaluation, shortlist and the Expert Council final.
Participants submit the project description, AI component explanation, results, demos/links and supporting materials through the online form.
Nominees who pass the eligibility review are presented to the public. This stage does not create the shortlist; it only affects the final score and the context of professional evaluation.
The Jury evaluates nominees across five professional criteria. The shortlist is formed only at this stage. If a nomination has fewer than 9 candidates, all nominees in that nomination move to the next stage.
The Expert Council forms the final score by considering public voting results, Jury scores, internal comments and all submitted materials.
Winners in each nomination are announced at the official ceremony. Public disclosure includes only final results and final average indicators.
Evaluation mechanics
At each stage, an average score is calculated from the scores given across the criteria. Then the stage averages are added together to create the final ranking within each nomination.
Maximum final score: 30 points. The winner in each nomination is the participant with the highest final score.
This nomination is not submitted to public voting. The final score is calculated as the sum of the Jury average score and the Expert Council average score. Maximum score: 25 points.
If two or more nominees receive the same final score, the decision is made by the Expert Council. The Council provides a written justification in terms of public benefit, real impact, AI depth and risk management.
| Condition | Transition rule | Role of public voting |
|---|---|---|
| If a nomination has 8 or fewer nominees | All nominees move to the Expert Council stage after the Jury evaluation. | It is added to the final score, but does not create a transition decision. |
| If a nomination has 9 or more nominees | The TOP-8 nominees with the highest Jury average score enter the shortlist. | It is not included in shortlist ranking; it is visible as context for the Jury and experts. |
| Tech Xəbər Seçimi | Candidates nominated by the editorial team are evaluated directly by the Jury and the Expert Council. | Not applicable. |
Evaluation base
Each criterion is applied not merely as a name, but as an evaluation logic: what is measured, how it is checked and why it matters.
The public audience evaluates whether the project is understandable, relevant and useful for society.
The Jury evaluates the project’s technological, business, application and execution quality from a professional perspective.
At the final stage, experts combine public, professional, strategic and risk-based evaluation.
Transparency and internal control
Evaluation is not only about final numbers. In the internal system, comments, scores and justifications are stored for each nominee.
The Jury and the Expert Council can see all applications: approved nominees, shortlist participants and applications rejected at the initial stage due to eligibility reasons. Rejected applications are not made public and do not participate in the competition, but remain visible in internal review to verify the objectivity of the process.
Members of the Jury and the Expert Council must leave a short comment or justification for each nominee. These comments, assigned scores and evaluation history are visible in the internal panel to the Jury and the Expert Council.
Public sources do not show which individual juror or expert voted for whom or how. The public sees only final results, final average indicators and official winner announcements.
Technical, commercial and personal information submitted in application forms is used for evaluation purposes. Where necessary, the Organizing Committee may request additional evidence, a demo, links or supporting materials.
Who can apply?
Official rules
These rules are applied to ensure that evaluation is fair, verifiable and reputationally safe.
The Organizing Committee checks applications for formal compliance, completeness of information, nomination choice and the presence of an AI component. This stage does not create an evaluation score.
The participant is responsible for the accuracy of the submitted information. If false, inflated or unverifiable information is discovered, the application may be removed at any stage.
The use of bots, mass fake accounts, technical manipulation and unethical promotion methods in public voting is prohibited. If suspicious activity is detected, results may be cancelled.
The Organizing Committee reserves the right to correct technical errors, clarify the nomination of an application, request additional information and make decisions in cases of rule violations.
FAQ