A web or mobile app called 'Honey Chain' that uses blockchain, AI, and IoT to track honey batches, verify authenticity via QR codes, and monitor hive health for beekeepers.
Ministry of MSME · Coordination Section · Software
Signing in saves it for your whole team, so everyone on your invite link sees the same two entries. Anything you shortlisted while signed out comes with you.
Decomposed from what the description asks for. Nothing added.
Blockchain Batch Tracking
A secure ledger to record honey batches and track them from hive to consumer.
QR Code Verification
A consumer-facing interface to scan QR codes and check honey authenticity.
IoT Hive Monitoring
A dashboard to receive and display environmental data from connected beehives.
AI Analytics Module
An AI component to predict productivity and detect diseases or colony health issues.
Both columns are read off the brief's own wording. Nothing here is inferred from the ministry's name.
The evaluators will check if the blockchain securely tracks batches, whether the QR code successfully authenticates honey for consumers, and if the AI and IoT features accurately monitor hive health and predict productivity.
A jury can still ask about these. Decide them deliberately rather than by accident.
Generated from the brief's own wording and the competition's published rules, never from a guess about what this ministry prefers.
Which blockchain framework or protocol should be used?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
What specific IoT hardware sensors are deployed in the hives?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
What data or models should power the AI disease detection?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
Has any part of this been shown at a previous event, hackathon or college project?
The guidelines are explicit: your solution must not have appeared in any previous event or programme, of any sort. A recycled project is what a team under time pressure reaches for.
The brief asks for blockchain batch tracking. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26021 itself: A secure ledger to record honey batches and track them from hive to consumer. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for qr code verification. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26021 itself: A consumer-facing interface to scan QR codes and check honey authenticity. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for iot hive monitoring. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26021 itself: A dashboard to receive and display environmental data from connected beehives. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for ai analytics module. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26021 itself: An AI component to predict productivity and detect diseases or colony health issues. The brief asks for it by name.
Where does your data come from: a published source, one you collect, or one you generate?
No dataset is attached to this problem statement, so sourcing it is part of the work and nobody told you that.
Why not use what already exists? Name the closest thing to this that is already running.
A team that has not named the alternative themselves is answering this for the first time in the room.
Which single thing will you demonstrate end to end, start to finish, with nothing skipped?
Ours, not a rule: a narrow thing that fully works survives questioning better than a broad thing that half works. If nobody on the team can name it, that is the finding.
Show me this working: the evaluators will check if the blockchain securely tracks batches, whether the QR code successfully authenticates honey for consumers, and if the AI and IoT features accurately monitor hive health and predict productivity.
This is the evaluator read for your problem statement, decoded from the brief's own wording.
Each one is quoted from a gap in the brief, not a guess about your team.
No measurable target
The description asks for disease detection and productivity prediction but provides no accuracy percentage or performance metrics.
What the organisers attached, and what the brief assumes you can get.
Same organisation, same year. Reading two of theirs tells you more about what they care about than reading one.