MPRI is a research-oriented master's program in fundamental computer science run jointly by the following partner institutions.

Partner institutions

• Université Paris Cité (coordinating institution)
• Université Paris Sciences & Lettres, including ENS Paris (Ulm)
• University Paris Saclay, including ENS Paris-Saclay
• Institut Polytechnique de Paris, including École polytechnique, Télécom Paris

Associated universities and research bodies

• Sorbonne Université
• Inria

The research environment of MPRI is exceptional: the laboratories supporting it work with CEA, CNRS or Inria, and are recognized at the highest international level. The laboratories in question include:

Within partner institutions

• IRIF, UMR 8243, Université Paris Cité & CNRS
• DI/ENS, UMR 8548, ENS Ulm, CNRS & Inria
• LMF, UMR 9021, Université Paris-Saclay, ENS Paris-Saclay & CNRS
• LIX, UMR 7161, École Polytechnique & CNRS
• LTCI, Telecom Paris Tech

Within associated institutions

• LIP6, UMR 7606, SU & CNRS
• Inria research units

A high number of MPRI students naturally turn to the above-mentioned laboratories to do their PhD thesis after completion of MPRI. Nonetheless, MPRI has resolutely adopted one of the missions of the Écoles Normales Supérieures and of the École Polytechnique, i.e. that of encouraging students not to do their PhD all at the same place, and rather take advantage of the whole academic network.

The organization of MPRI is based on a Studies Committee and a Steering Committee, both chaired by the MPRI director(s).

The MPRI director (or directors) is proposed by the Steering Committee to the directors of the partner institutions, for a renewable 4-year term.

Since January 2024, the MPRI directors are Prof. Jean Goubault-Larrecq (ENS Paris-Saclay), Dr. Brice Minaud (ENS Paris, Inria), and Prof. Sylvain Schmitz (Université Paris-Cité).

Past MPRI Directors of MPRI were: Professor Olivier Carton, Université Paris-Cité (2017-2023), Professor Roberto Amadio, Paris Diderot University (2014-2017), Professor Hubert Comon-Lundh, ENS Cachan (2010-2013), and Professor Paul Gastin, ENS Cachan (2006-2009).

The Studies Committee is in charge of all practical and daily aspects of MPRI, as well as of relations to individual students; of student selection and educational support—notably via approval of external courses; of the search for and setting up of internships, and their evaluation; and of all MPRI communications (website, application forms, etc).

The Studies Committee is also in charge of maintaining the syllabus, including the evaluation of new course proposals, and potential re-evaluation of existing courses. This evaluation is based on many criterions, including thematic balance, student feedback, future prospects for research positions, and number of students attending a course.

Each partner institution must appoint a study director, who is in charge of liaising for MPRI with the students and the head office of their institution. See here for more details.

The Studies Committee consists of:

• The MPRI director(s);
• the study director appointed by each partner institution;
• other researchers or teacher-researchers whose names have been put forward by a partner institution, or by MPRI teaching staff.

The same person may be a member of both the Steering Committee and the Studies Committee.

The researchers and/or teachers-researchers currently appointed to the Studies Committee are:

The Steering Committee acts as the board of directors of MPRI. The Steering Committee consists at least of:

• The MPRI director(s);
• two researchers or teachers-researchers appointed by the head of each partner institution;
• one researcher or teacher-researcher appointed by the head of each associated institution;

The Steering Committee makes all educational, scientific, administrative and financial decisions of a general nature with respect to MPRI. The Steering Committee meets at least once a year to discuss strategic issues regarding the management of the Master.

The researchers and/or teachers-researchers currently appointed to the Steering Committee by the partner and associated institutions are:

The following rules are meant to clarify specific aspects of MPRI, and provide a guiding framework. They should be understood with some flexibility, to be evaluated by MPRI management according to the spirit of each rule. Towards that end, and to the extent possible, each rule is accompanied by an explanation of its purpose, and whose interest the rule serves.

These rules are not meant to be exhaustive, and may be augmented or modified by the MPRI director, after consulting the MPRI Steering Committee.

• A teacher refers to any person who gives a course at M2 MPRI, whether they are a teacher-researcher, researcher, engineer, or other.
• A student refers to any person registered at M2 MPRI, or who takes at least one course at M2 MPRI.

Rules are presented in no particular order.

Each M2 MPRI course must have a single course manager.

The course manager organizes the course, with the help of the course teachers. They may or may not be a teacher in the course themselves. They are also in charge of providing an interface between MPRI management, course teachers, as well as students following the course.

They are responsible for the course working properly: the course webpage should be up to date, grades should be entered on the pedagogical server in a timely manner, etc.

In the interest of diversity, a course manager may not manage more than one course.

Purpose:

• (in the interest of management) to facilitate communications between MPRI management and teachers, and to have a clear person in charge of making sure the course operates as it should.

A teacher giving a course at M2 MPRI may not teach another course with a large overlap in content, including outside MPRI.

In doubt, the course manager may contact MPRI management.

Purpose:

• (in the interest of students) to guarantee a diversity of teaching and teaching approaches. It should be noted that students are allowed to take external courses, so teaching a course at MPRI with a large overlap with another course provides less value than an entirely new course.
• (in the common interest) if students are seen as potential future interns or PhD students, a course serves as a showcase for recruitment. The rule contributes to the fairness of recruitment across different fields.

A teacher may teach at most 24 hours per year at M2 MPRI.

This is the total number of hours taught, not a TD equivalent. Exceptions must be negotiated with MPRI management.

Purpose:

• (in the interest of students) to guarantee a diversity of teaching, and teaching approaches.
• (in the common interest) if students are seen as potential future interns or PhD students, a course serves as a showcase for recruitment. The rule contributes to the fairness of recruitment across different fields.

A course may not have more than 2 teachers per 24-hour period in the same year, on average.

In addition, a teacher must, to the extent possible, teach their course sessions consecutively. If the course follows a format such as “2 hours of class, then 1 hour of interventions/projects/TD”, the rule only concerns the course part: external speakers during the last hour do not count towards the limit of two teachers.

Purpose:

• (in the interest of students) to avoid a loss of focus in the topics covered, which would risk confusing students, or may provide an impression of following a series of seminars instead of a course. This is a frequent criticism in surveys conducted among students.

A teacher at M2 MPRI must practice in Île-de-France.

By practicing, we mean: working in Île-de-France, or being attached to a laboratory in Île-de-France. Occasional exceptions may be granted, particularly in the case of important themes that could not otherwise be covered, and for which teachers agree to travel to Paris to teach in person.

Purpose:

• (in the interest of students) having lectures in person is important, the use of videoconferencing should only be exceptional (confinement due to a pandemic situation, absence of a teacher for a course session that could not be postponed or exchanged with another session of the same course, for example).
• (in the interest of the coherence of MPRI) the course offering at MPRI already covers a broad spectrum of topics in theoretical computer science. Expanding it further to offer topics that are not present locally does not seem necessary. The intent of MPRI is to pool together resources (students, teachers, topics) at a regional level, not a national one.

Changes of course manager, teaching team, or substantial changes in course content must be submitted to the MPRI Studies Committee for approval.

Minor changes are not subject to this rule. A minor change is understood to mean correction of errors in course notes, addition or removal of exercises, exchange of course sessions, or other details that do not change the substance of the course. A change to be submitted to the Academic Committee would be, for example, that the course instructors consider that a new important development in the course themes should be presented, or that an approach previously taught should be abandoned.

The changes in question include not only changes posted on the course webpage, but also changes actually made during class. It is understood that the course webpage should correctly reflect course contents.

In case of doubt, the course manager should contact MPRI management. If necessary, the Studies Committee will determine whether a change is substantial or not.

Purpose:

• (in the interest of students) to avoid the disappointment of registering for a course only to discover that what is taught is different from what was expected, and to enable students to choose courses with accurate information.

An internship supervisor may be the main supervisor of at most one M2 MPRI internship each year. They may only be the co-supervisor of at most two M2 MPRI internships each year.

Each internship must have a main supervisor, with possible co-supervisors.

Purpose:

• (in the common interest) to contribute towards fairness in the recruitment of interns or future doctoral students in each laboratory.
• (in the interest of students) to avoid overloading supervisors or co-supervisors with too many interns, which may result in an inferior internship experience.

Course managers must ensure that exam grades are fully entered on the pedagogical server, no later than fifteen days after the end of the relevant exam period.

Purpose:

• (in the interest of students) a late grade in the first period prevents students from knowing whether they should validate additional courses, or request a second session. In the second period, a late grade is a handicap for applications to internships, PhDs, scholarships, etc. Late grades also cause anxiety for students.

Prospective teachers wishing to propose a new course to MPRI should contact the MPRI director(s) no later than May 15, in order to potentially start teaching in September of the same year. They will be required to fill a document asking, among other things, for the following information.

• A title, acronym, and list of themes for the course. Themes should be chosen among existing themes.
• A teaching team, which should respect the MPRI rules.
• A source of funding to pay the teaching team. The MPRI master itself has no source of funding; teachers at MPRI are paid by their own institutions, or sometimes by a partner institution of MPRI who has agreed to pay for external teachers.
• A presentation of the course material, and discussion of why it would benefit the MPRI syllabus.
• Information about how the course would integrate with existing courses.

New course proposals will be evaluated by the Studies Committee by the end of June of the same year. Please note that there is a hard limit to how many courses can be taught at MPRI, in part due to the physical constraint of having only two classrooms available in parallel. The Studies Committee may also consider questions of thematic balance. Due to these factors and others, an excellent course proposal may not be accepted. Prospective teachers are encouraged to discuss with MPRI management for more information.

MPRI students may be asked to provide anonymous feedback in two ways.

• On the pedagogical server, they will be invited to provide feedback for each course where they were registered. This feedback will be visible to the course teachers (in an anonymous way).
• Each year, the MPRI director(s) may choose to ask the students for global feedback, especially aiming to improve MPRI in ways that are not course-specific.

Teachers should look at course feedback each year, to see if some criticisms are actionable, and to get a sense of the students' opinions.

Course-specific feedback is taken into account when evaluating courses. Global feedback is discussed when proposing changes to the MPRI structure, and can also inspire some changes directly.

In addition, students (and teachers) are welcome to send feedback or comments to the MPRI director(s) (contact). Students may also send their feedback to their study director, or any other teacher or supervisor, if they prefer to remain anonymous to the rest of MPRI management. Students are of course free to require that their feedback may or may not be shared beyond the Studies Committee.