Click any row to unfold its full profile — roster, per-problem chart, rank on every metric. Column headers sort the table (# is the place under the current sort); definitions live in the methodology at the bottom of the page.
| # | university | n | best | score▼ | average | median | FSTHM | league |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sharif University of Technology | 4 | 203 | 701.5 | 182 | 171.5 | 3·1· | First Prize |
| 2 | Charles University Prague | 4 | 179 | 690 | 173 | 170 | 4··· | First Prize |
| 3 | Kyiv Taras Shevchenko Univ | 4 | 185 | 656.8 | 170.3 | 163 | 211· | Second Prize |
| 4 | Warsaw University | 4 | 180 | 607 | 154.3 | 141.5 | 13·· | Second Prize |
| 5 | Eötvös University , Budapest | 9 | 184 | 600.8 | 164 | 97 | 1332 | Second Prize |
| 6 | Sofia University | 3 | 174 | 468 | 117 | 102 | 111· | Third Prize |
| 7 | Technical University, Budapest | 4 | 141 | 435.5 | 112.7 | 98.5 | ·211 | Third Prize |
| 8 | Ljubljana University | 4 | 113 | 382 | 97.7 | 90 | ·13· | Third Prize |
| 9 | Babes-Bolyai University | 3 | 91 | 340 | 85 | 89 | ··3· | Third Prize |
| 10 | University of Debrecen | 3 | 134 | 313.3 | 78.3 | 51 | ·1·2 | HM |
| 11 | Free University Berlin | 4 | 78 | 261.8 | 69.3 | 65 | ··3· | Third Prize |
| 12 | Oxford University | 5 | 72 | 252.8 | 69.3 | 68 | ··3· | Third Prize |
| 13 | Humboldt University Berlin | 4 | 118 | 213.3 | 56 | 25 | ·1·1 | |
| 14 | Adam Mickiewicz University | 3 | 73 | 176 | 44 | 45 | ··11 | |
| 15 | University College London | 5 | 51 | 150 | 40.7 | 34 | ···3 | HM |
| fewer than 3 contestants — individual results, not team statistics | ||||||||
| — | Belgrade University | 2 | 193 | — | — | — | 11·· | |
| — | Vilnius University Lithuania | 2 | 183 | — | — | — | 11·· | |
| — | Kiev Polytechnic Institute | 2 | 179 | — | — | — | 11·· | |
| — | Cambridge University | 2 | 169 | — | — | — | 11·· | |
| — | Szeged University | 2 | 133 | — | — | — | ·2·· | |
| — | University of Helsinki | 2 | 119 | — | — | — | ·11· | |
| — | University of Tartu | 2 | 111 | — | — | — | ·11· | |
| — | Vilnius UniversityLithuania | 1 | 110 | — | — | — | ·1·· | |
| — | Helsinki Univ of Technology | 2 | 108 | — | — | — | ·11· | |
| — | University of Nis | 2 | 106 | — | — | — | ·11· | |
| — | University of Szeged | 2 | 83 | — | — | — | ··11 | |
| — | Veliko Turnovo University | 1 | 43 | — | — | — | ···1 | |
| — | Bessenyei College, Nyíregyháza | 2 | 8 | — | — | — | ···· | |
One row per university: everyone printed under that affiliation, team or not.
87 contestants · 28 universities (15 ranked) · prize cutoffs: First ≥ 160 · Second ≥ 102 · Third ≥ 59 · Honourable Mention ≥ 30
Methodology
Grouping. Contestants are grouped by the university printed in the official individual results, after a safe cleanup (case, diacritics, punctuation). Contestants with no listed affiliation form a separate unranked bucket. This view is unofficial; the IMC team contest (registered teams, incl. national and combined squads) is a different ranking.
Score formulas. official = sum of the top-3 totals + mean of all members (the IMC team-contest formula used in 2006–2019, applied here to university rosters); top-3 avg, top-5 avg (needs n ≥ 5), median, mean, best. The # column is the place under the current sort (ties share a place) — sort by any column and # becomes the rank in that rating; the default sort is the selected score formula, and clicking # returns to it. Only universities with n ≥ 3 are ranked; smaller ones are listed below with their individual results — facts, not statistics.
Median. For an even roster the median is the mean of the two middle totals — never the upper one, so a 4-person team gets no free half-step up.
A caveat on the official formula: its team-average term is not size-monotone — bringing one extra weaker contestant can lower the score (the top-3 formulas and the league never punish a bigger delegation). Keep that in mind when comparing selective and inclusive teams under the default ranking.
League = the prize level of the team’s third-best contestant, measured against this year’s real prize cutoffs. Third-best, because that grades the whole leading trio (the classic “team of three”), and because it is monotone: bringing one more student can never lower it — a median-based league would punish exactly the teams that bring many students. The median is shown separately in the passport. Prize cutoffs are used because they are published, understood by everyone, and auto-adjust to each year’s difficulty — no invented thresholds.
Evenness. balance = 3rd-best / best (1.00 = perfectly even trio); star gap = best − 2nd; without best = where the team would rank after removing its best contestant. Deliberately no mean/std composites: on rosters of 3–5 they reward “even but weak”.
Small-cohort honesty. Team shares are phrased “k/n”, never bare percents; points are only compared within one year (prize shares and percentiles travel across years, points don’t).