Pure Mathematics drew 104 candidates in CSS 2025 and allocated 2 of them, and both candidates who cleared the written stage went on to seats. The paper is a hard one, with a mean of 31% below the passing line, so the filtering happens almost entirely within the exam. For the rare candidate who clears it, however, the route to allocation proved clean.
The two seats split between one woman and one man, an even outcome in a sample of two. No gender pattern can be drawn from so small a result.
Pure Mathematics' mean of 31% trails the CSS optional-subject average of 43.5% by 12.5 points, marking it as one of the harder papers to score in despite the strong quantitative backgrounds many of its candidates hold. The assumption that mathematical training makes this a safe pick is not supported by the figures. Because it sits well below the field average, clearing 33% already lifts a candidate above most competitors, but with only 2 seats the margin is almost nil. The realistic aim is to score far above the mean.
Of the 104 who appeared, 2 passed the written stage and both were allocated. Because the mean of 31% sits below the 33% threshold, the paper itself is the dominant bottleneck, with all but two candidates failing it rather than being filtered out on merit. The clean conversion of both written passers into seats shows the merit stage posed no further barrier for the two who reached it.
The mean of 31% sits two points under the passing line, and with the median lower at 27% the distribution carries a thin upper tail lifting the average. A standard deviation of 23 points is very wide, placing a candidate one deviation below the mean at 8% and one above at 54%, so reaching a pass requires scoring far above the cohort. This is among the highest-risk scoring profiles in the examination, since the typical candidate falls well short and only the genuinely exceptional cross the line. The wide spread reflects a paper that sharply separates a tiny number of capable mathematicians from everyone else.
Both allocations went to Punjab, with no other province securing a seat. With only two allocations the concentration carries no real weight beyond recording the two outcomes.
Pure Mathematics rewards only candidates with genuine mathematical command who can perform with accuracy under exam pressure, and it defeats everyone else through a sub-threshold mean and a tiny allocation count. The clean conversion for the rare candidate who clears the written stage is real, but reaching that standard is the hard part. This is a subject to attempt from demonstrated excellence, not as a quantitative gamble.