IX. Judging Results and Designations
名称之间有什么区别？
未判断 - 未正确提交解决方案。一些示例包括文件损坏或损坏、文件以错误的格式发送，或者未按照说明中所述提交解决方案。
取消资格 - 该团队的报告被发现违反了比赛规则。
不合格 - P lagiarism：解决方案论文有未记录的来源、逐字文本或从互联网上提取的信息，和/或与评委和/或我们的成对比较软件确定的其他论文非常相似。团队成员使用的所有来自外部来源的信息、想法、数据、算法等都必须记录原始来源并正确引用。我们的成对比较软件将论文和/或论文的一部分识别为与提交的其他论文相似或完全相同。被取消资格 - W eb：COMAP 将解决方案文件或解决方案文件的某些部分确定为共享或发布，或者发现一名（或多名）团队成员通过交互式网站或电子媒体获得了帮助。严禁在比赛周末期间在任何地方发布或分享问题陈述的全部或任何部分、您的解决方案或部分解决方案。也禁止获取任何其他人的全部或任何部分解决方案。比赛规则禁止在团队成员之外寻求帮助，也禁止亲自或通过任何媒介从人为来源获得帮助。COMAP在比赛期间持续监控互联网。
不成功的参赛者 - 团队的报告没有充分响应比赛问题的要求，或者发现团队（或团队成员）在比赛期间访问了讨论比赛问题的互联网网站。
不成功的参赛者 - W eb：团队成员（或成员）访问了公开讨论比赛问题的网站或社交媒体。比赛规则禁止在团队成员之外寻求帮助，也禁止亲自或通过任何媒介从人为来源获得帮助。在比赛期间，COMAP将持续监控互联网，包括公开讨论比赛解决方案的网站和社交媒体。未成功的参赛者 - 不完整：解决方案文件被发现明显不完整，并且在充分回应比赛问题或其要求方面没有表现出任何认真的努力。
S奖 - 团队齐心协力应对比赛问题并提交解决方案报告。然而，该报告对全部或部分要求的回应不完整，和/或在建模过程、分析、结论和/或沟通方面显示出一些缺陷或弱点。
H奖 - 该团队的解决方案报告表明，在解决所有问题需求方面付出了高于平均水平的努力，并包含被认为在建模和问题解决、分析、结论和结果交流方面显示出健全和支持的过程的元素。
M奖 - 团队的解决方案报告在建模和问题解决、分析、结论和沟通等多个方面都非常出色。该报告以清晰、有据可查、组织良好和表述良好的方式处理了所有要求。
F奖 - “入围者”称号旨在表彰其解决方案报告堪称典范并因此进入最后一轮评审的团队。这些论文以有条理和清晰的表述方式提供了完整和合乎逻辑的分析，而不仅仅是解决需求。这些论文易于阅读、易于理解、逻辑性强且全面。入围论文是所有团队提交的论文中最好的。
O奖 - “杰出”称号旨在表彰其解决方案报告在最后一轮评审中被确定为“最佳中的佼佼者”的团队。这些团队的报告在建模和解决问题、分析和沟通方面的模范学生工作方面，相对于比赛提交的内容而言处于最高水平。COMAP可以发布和使用全部或部分这些提交的内容，作为优秀学生作品的例子。
What are the differences between the designations?
Not Judged - The solution was not submitted correctly. Some examples include damaged or corrupted file, file sent in the wrong format, or not submitting your solution as outlined in the instructions.
Disqualified - The team's report was found to be in violation of the contest rules.
Disqualified - P lagiarism: The solution paper had undocumented sources, verbatim text, or information lifted from the Internet, and/or was very similar to other papers submitted as determined by judges and/or our pairwise comparison software. All information, ideas, data, algorithms, etc. from outside sources used by team members must have the original source documented and properly referenced. Our pairwise comparison software identifies papers and/or parts of papers as similar to, or exactly the same as, other papers submitted.Disqualified - W eb: COMAP identified the solution paper, or portions of the solution paper as shared or posted, or a team member (or members) were found to have received assistance through interactive web sites or electronic media. Posting or sharing all, or any part of the problem statement, your solution, or partial solution anywhere during the contest weekend is strictly prohibited. Obtaining all, or any part, of anyone else's solution is also prohibited. Contest rules prohibit seeking assistance outside of team members or obtaining help from human sources in person or via any medium. COMAP continually monitors the Internet during the contest period.
Unsuccessful Participant - The team's report did not adequately respond to the requirements of the contest problem or a team (or team member) was found to have visited Internet sites discussing the contest problem during the contest period.
Unsuccessful Participant - W eb: A team member (or members) visited websites or social media where contest problems were being openly discussed. Contest rules prohibit seeking assistance outside of team members or obtaining help from human sources in person or via any medium. COMAP is continually monitoring the Internet during the contest period to include websites and social media where contest solutions are being openly discussed.Unsuccessful Participant - I ncomplete: The solution paper was found to be significantly incomplete and did not show any serious effort in adequately responding to the contest problem or its requirements.
Successful Participant - The team made a concerted effort to respond to the contest problem and submit a solution report. The report, however, had incomplete responses to all or some requirements, and/or showed some deficiencies or weakness in the modeling processes, analysis, conclusions, and/or communication.
Honorable Mention - The team's solution report indicated an above average effort in addressing all problem requirements, and contained elements that were judged to show sound and supported processes in modeling and problem solving, analysis, conclusions, and communication of results.
Meritorious - The team's solution report was excellent in many aspects of modeling and problem solving, analysis, conclusions, and communication. The report addressed all requirements in a clear, well-supported, well-organized, and well-presented manner.
Finalist - The designation Finalist recognizes teams whose solution reports are exemplary and therefore reached the final round of judging. These papers present complete and logical analysis in an organized and clear presentation above and beyond simply addressing the requirements. These papers are easy to read, easy to follow, logical, and comprehensive. Finalist papers are among the best of all team submissions.
Outstanding Winner - The designation Outstanding recognizes teams whose solution reports are determined, in the final round of judging, to be the "best of the best." These teams' reports are at the highest level relative to the contest submissions in terms of exemplary student work in modeling and problem solving, analysis, and communication. COMAP may publish and use all or part of these submissions as examples of outstanding student work.