International Mathematical Olympiad
Enable an AI agent to recognise the International Mathematical Olympiad, assess the readiness and integrity of a particular edition, and determine which participation, contest and results actions are authorised.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
Researched by: Codex + Grok
Purpose and description
Enable an AI agent to recognise the International Mathematical Olympiad, assess the readiness and integrity of a particular edition, and determine which participation, contest and results actions are authorised.
The International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO) is an annual, invitation-based high-school mathematics contest run under IMO Board regulations, in which each participating country may enter up to six pre-university students under 20 to sit two 4.5-hour papers of three proof problems each, with individual scores out of 42 determining medals.
It can be Resolve a purported IMO edition, delegation or result against official competition records.; Assess registration and contestant eligibility evidence and identify the decision still required.; Check contest readiness across approved papers, translations, sessions and authorised roles.; Gate access to unreleased problems and identify confidentiality or contest-integrity incidents requiring escalation.; Reconcile per-problem marks, coordination decisions and published outcomes.; Prepare a results publication or correction for the authorised actor, preserving its evidence and approval status..
Distinguishing features
The identity must connect to the officially recognised annual International Mathematical Olympiad for high-school students; a matching acronym or commercial competition title is insufficient. [Official IMO overview](https://www.imo-official.org/about/?language=en)
Participation is organised through invited country delegations with up to six contestants, a Leader and a Deputy Leader, distinguishing the IMO from an open individual-entry mathematics examination. [IMO regulations](https://www.imo-official.org/regulations/)
The standard contest uses six problems across two consecutive days, with final problems selected by a Jury consisting of team leaders; historical or exceptional editions require their own supporting evidence. [Official IMO overview](https://www.imo-official.org/about/?language=en)
An edition's authority must be traceable through the IMO General Regulations, applicable Annual Regulations and relevant Articles of Association, rather than inferred from a national team's selection rules. [IMO regulations](https://www.imo-official.org/regulations/)
Scope
+ Competition identity, annual editions and the authority of applicable regulations
+ Invited delegations, contestant eligibility and participation decisions
+ Problem selection, approved translations and confidentiality
+ Contest sessions, permitted assistance and incident handling
+ Marking, coordination, unresolved scoring decisions and awards
+ Official publication, corrections and edition closure
- National olympiads, selection examinations and training programmes
- The IMO Association's corporate administration beyond its competition authority
- Contestants' general biographies, education records and subsequent careers
- Mathematical knowledge and proof libraries beyond their use in contest problems and adjudication
- Host travel, accommodation and venue operations except where they affect participation or contest validity
- Other competitions using IMO initials or similar mathematical olympiad branding
Characteristics
- Edition identity
- Competition identity linked to official edition number, year and host record Prevents rules, contestants and results from different editions being combined.
- Applicable rule set
- General Regulations version, Annual Regulations version and documented amendments or decisions Makes each eligibility, procedural and award judgement reproducible.
- Edition phase
- Proposed model vocabulary: preparation, registration, contest, coordination, results published, closed; exceptional status recorded separately Determines whether actions such as changing a roster or releasing a paper are appropriate.
- Delegation admission
- Invited, awaiting confirmation, admitted, withdrawn or refused, with decision evidence Separates an intended participant from an authorised delegation.
- Contestant eligibility assessment
- Unassessed, evidence incomplete, eligible, ineligible or disputed under the applicable edition rules Prevents participation decisions based only on age summaries or national nomination.
- Contest paper configuration
- Problems per session and allotted minutes, recorded for the edition Supports session validation without imposing the current format on historical editions.
- Problem access status
- Proposed model vocabulary: restricted proposal, restricted shortlist, selected paper, authorised release Controls whether an agent may retrieve, share or publish problem material.
- Script score
- Points per problem and total, using the edition's authorised scale Supports score reconciliation while preserving provisional and agreed values.
- Adjudication status
- Awaiting assessment, under coordination, unresolved, agreed or officially corrected Prevents unsettled marks from being presented as final results.
- Award determination
- Edition-authorised award category or no award, linked to the official decision Distinguishes a predicted award from an officially conferred outcome.
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 7 bundles · 13 layers · 20 findings · 32 questions.
IMO identity and edition authority Establish which competition and annual edition a record concerns and which rules govern it.
The IMO is a continuing competition whose individual editions can have different hosts, arrangements and applicable rules.
Competition and edition recognition
Connect the registered identity to authoritative edition records.
Official edition linkage
Record evidence connecting the claimed edition, year and host to the registered IMO identity.
- Which official record identifies this edition's number, year and host? provenance
- Does the record concern the IMO itself, a national selection event or another competition with similar branding? boundary
Rules and decision authority
Identify applicable rule versions and the actors empowered to interpret or apply them.
Edition rule authority
Record the governing documents and the authority supporting edition-specific decisions or exceptions.
- Which General and Annual Regulations, amendments and recorded decisions apply to this edition? provenance
- Which decisions belong to the Jury, IMO Board, host organisation or another designated role? action
Delegations and contestant admission Represent the route from invitation and nomination to authorised participation.
National selection alone does not establish that a delegation or contestant satisfies the IMO edition's admission requirements.
Delegation recognition
Establish the represented country or territory, invitation and accepted delegation roles.
Authorised delegation roster
Record invitation evidence, participation confirmation and the status of the nominated roster.
- What invitation and confirmation establish this delegation's participation status? provenance
- Does the roster satisfy the edition's contestant limit and requirements for Leader, Deputy Leader and any additional roles? measurement
Individual eligibility
Assess each nominee against the applicable age, education and representation requirements.
Evidenced eligibility decision
Separate nomination, supporting evidence and an authorised eligibility determination.
- What evidence establishes compliance with the edition's exact age cutoff, education conditions and country-representation requirements? provenance
- Who may resolve missing evidence, a disputed qualification or a proposed contestant substitution? action
Problem selection and secrecy Track competition problems from submitted proposals through selection, translation and authorised release.
Problem suitability, equivalent wording and restricted access directly affect whether the IMO can be conducted fairly.
Proposal to contest paper
Record the authority and evidence behind shortlist inclusion and final paper selection.
Problem selection record
Distinguish a submitted proposal, shortlisted candidate and selected contest problem without implying that all are publicly accessible.
- What evidence establishes the problem's origin, review status and selection for a particular contest position? provenance
- What checks or unresolved concerns concern prior exposure, correctness, difficulty or overlap with other selected problems? boundary
Translations and restricted access
Control problem versions, approved languages and disclosure permissions.
Authorised problem version and access
Record which wording is approved for use and who may access it at the current competition phase.
- Which approved translation and version must each contestant receive, and how are wording discrepancies resolved? definition
- May this actor access or disclose this problem now, and what recorded authority permits release? action
Contest delivery and integrity Represent the conditions under which contestants write and submit their solutions.
A score is meaningful only when the associated sitting followed authorised timing, assistance and submission conditions.
Authorised contest sittings
Describe the edition's actual sessions and any approved departures from standard delivery.
Sitting conditions and completion
Record paper allocation, timing, attendance and script receipt for each contestant's sitting.
- What problems, duration, location or delivery arrangement and approved accommodations apply to this sitting? definition
- Were the authorised time conditions met, and is every submitted script accounted for? measurement
Clarifications and contest incidents
Distinguish permitted procedural help from assistance or disruption that requires an integrity decision.
Incident and response record
Preserve clarification requests, suspected breaches, interruptions and authorised responses without treating allegations as findings.
- What evidence distinguishes an authorised clarification from prohibited assistance or access to restricted material? boundary
- Who must decide the response to this incident, and which participation or scoring actions depend on that decision? action
Proof assessment and coordination Connect submitted mathematical arguments to marking criteria and resolved scores.
The model must distinguish a proposed evaluation of a proof from the score established through the edition's authorised adjudication process.
Scripts and marking criteria
Associate each score proposal with the contestant's actual work and the applicable marking guidance.
Traceable problem assessment
Record the evidence for credit, including alternative arguments and identified gaps.
- Which script passages and applicable marking criteria support the proposed points for this problem? provenance
- Does an alternative solution or disputed proof gap require a decision beyond the currently documented criteria? boundary
Score agreement and escalation
Track coordination, unresolved differences and the authority for final marks.
Resolved coordination outcome
Preserve proposed marks, agreement evidence and any escalation or subsequent correction.
- Which marks are agreed, which remain disputed, and what record establishes each status? measurement
- What authorised coordination or escalation step must occur before this score can be treated as final? action
Awards and official results Convert settled scores and authorised award decisions into traceable published outcomes.
Computed totals, predicted medals and country summaries must remain distinguishable from officially adopted and published results.
Award determination
Represent the edition's award rules, adopted thresholds and contestant outcomes.
Authorised award allocation
Link each award to settled marks and the edition's recorded award decisions.
- Which adopted thresholds and other criteria govern medals, honourable mentions and any additional awards in this edition? provenance
- Do the proposed awards reconcile with final problem scores and all applicable award decisions? measurement
Publication and corrections
Identify authoritative result releases and preserve the history of amendments.
Official result version
Record the published result version, its approval and its relationship to derived standings or later corrections.
- Which official release supports this result, and is a displayed country standing an official classification or a derived aggregation? provenance
- Who may approve a correction, and which totals, awards and published views must be updated with it? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Kinds and varieties
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- Annual in-person contest edition (the canonical IMO, hosted by a country)
- Remote or virtual contest edition (used in 2020-2021)
- Contest papers (Day 1 / Day 2, problems 1-6)
- IMO Shortlist (jury-considered problems, published after an embargo)
- IMO Longlist (all problems submitted by participating countries)
- National team (up to six contestants plus leader and deputy leader)
- Individual classification with gold, silver, bronze, and honourable mention
- Unofficial team ranking (sum of the six individual scores)
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Identifiers and schemes
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- Wikidata - Q7983 - Item for the International Mathematical Olympiad as a recurring contest.
- IMO official edition name - IMO YYYY (also sequential number from IMO 1 in 1959) - Used on imo-official.org for each annual contest.
- IMO problem identifier - IMO YYYY Pn with n in 1-6 - Day 1 is P1-P3, Day 2 is P4-P6; shortlist items use a separate shortlist code.
- imo-official.org person/country records - Numeric contestant and ISO-style country codes in the official results database - Canonical public result identifiers, not a formal ISO standard for the contest itself.
- Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Standards and regulation
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- IMO Regulations, issued by the IMO Board and applied by the jury of national team leaders
- Host-country agreement and local site rules, issued by the host organisation under IMO Board oversight
- Eligibility rule: contestant under 20 on the day of the second paper and not officially registered at a university or equivalent (IMO Regulations)
- Medal rule: gold:silver:bronze approximately 1:2:3, with total medals not exceeding half the contestants; honourable mention for a complete solution without a medal (IMO Regulations)
- IMO Foundation (supporting charity) provides continuity, fundraising, and organiser support; it does not itself set the contest mathematics
- Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- National olympiad pipelines (for example USAMO/TST, China's CMO and training camp, or a single national olympiad in smaller countries) used to choose the six-person team
- Past contest papers and shortlists used as the main training corpus for olympiad programmes worldwide
- Individual medals and team totals used as a university-admissions and scholarship signal, especially in Eastern Europe and East and Southeast Asia
- Jury of team leaders approves the six problems, translates papers, and coordinates marking against agreed schemes
- Recent benchmark for machine mathematical reasoning (systems attempting IMO-level proof problems), which is not itself an official contest class
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Typical measurements
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- Individual total score - 0-42 - points
- Score per problem - 0-7 - points
- Unofficial team total (six contestants) - 0-252 - points
- Written time - 4.5 hours on each of two days - hours
- Team size - 1-6 contestants (maximum 6) - persons
- Participating countries (recent editions) - about 100-110 - countries
- Contestants (recent editions) - about 600-700 - persons
- Gold-medal cutoff (year-dependent) - typically about 24-32 out of 42 - points
- Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- Translation error that changes the intended problem
- Leak of the shortlist or contest paper before the sitting
- Inconsistent coordination of partial-credit marks across marking teams
- Ineligible contestants (age or already registered at a tertiary institution)
- Integrity failure in remote sittings (collusion, outside help)
- Difficulty collapse, with near-zero scores on P3 and P6
- Host cancellation, venue failure, or funding collapse
- Chronic under-representation of female contestants relative to the eligible population
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Regional variation
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- Official English name is International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO); French and other Romance languages often use Olympiade Internationale de Mathématiques / Olimpiada Internacional de Matemáticas (OIM)
- School-system embedding and selection intensity are much higher in China, Korea, Vietnam, Russia and the former USSR, Romania, and Hungary than in most of Western Europe
- Some countries run multi-stage camps after the national olympiad; others send the national-olympiad winners with little extra selection
- Historical unofficial extra contestants existed in some programmes; current regulations cap the official team at six
- Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.
- European Girls' Mathematical Olympiad (EGMO) - Girls-only invitational olympiad, typically four contestants and four problems, not the open-gender IMO.
- William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition - Undergraduate contest for the US and Canada, twelve problems in two three-hour sessions, not a high-school international olympiad.
- International Mathematics Competition for University Students (IMC) - Undergraduate international contest, not the pre-university IMO.
- International Physics Olympiad (IPhO) - Same olympiad movement and national-team pattern, but physics rather than proof-based mathematics.
- Mathematical Kangaroo (Kangourou) - Mass-participation multiple-choice contest, not a six-problem proof olympiad with medals by rank cutoff.
- Regional proof olympiads (APMO, Balkan MO, Romanian Master of Mathematics, and similar) - IMO-like proof format and often overlapping contestants, but they are regional or invitational events, not the IMO itself.
- International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM) - Professional research congress that awards Fields Medals; it is not a student contest.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of International Mathematical Olympiad this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Sources
- International Mathematical Olympiad (official site, results and regulations) - Official definition of the contest, eligibility, paper format, scoring out of 42, medal rules, country teams of at most six, and the historical results archive.
- IMO Regulations - Governance by the IMO Board and the jury of team leaders; host obligations; age and non-enrolment eligibility; two 4.5-hour papers; 7 points per problem; medal-ratio rule (about 1:2:3, medals not more than half the contestants); honourable mentions.
- International Mathematical Olympiad - Series history from the 1959 Romanian first edition, typical participation scale, remote 2020-2021 editions, and the distinction from regional olympiads and university contests.
- The IMO Compendium: A Collection of Problems Suggested for the International Mathematical Olympiads, 1959-2009 - The practical distinction among contest papers, shortlist, and longlist, and the use of IMO problems as a training and research corpus.
What the second pass must settle
- Does an existing Vercy world model already own this competition or a concept that requires linking this registry entry instead of publishing a separate model?
- With no registry definition recorded, should the identity include the IMO's associated educational and social programme, or only the competition and activities necessary for its validity?
- Which historical format changes and exceptional delivery arrangements must the model represent, and where are their authoritative rules archived?
- What are the exact current authority boundaries and procedures for eligibility disputes, confidentiality incidents, scoring escalation and post-publication corrections?
- Which internal selection, coordination and contestant-evidence records are available to an authorised agent, and what access and retention conditions govern them?