Public record
Software health reportschema 0.31.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-08-12 23:01 UTC

NVIDIA / cuml

NVIDIA cuML: GPU-Accelerated Machine Learning

Python · C++ · CudaApache-2.0★ 5,251 stars⑂ 651 forkssince Oct 2018View on GitHub ↗

NVIDIA/cuml holds a health index of 98 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (96/100) and lowest on Security (67/100). It was last updated today. 5 contributors account for most of its recent work.

98
overall / 100
Exceptional

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

98
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 86 is calibrated to 98 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

NVIDIA CorporationOrganization
28,897 followers789 public repossince May 2012

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIcumlpoints to another repo — not scored0.6.1.post1-12263 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

96Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recencylast push 0 days ago
35.3/36Commit cadence51/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume812 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year812
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year51
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases53 releases published
36/36Release recencylatest release 7 days ago
19.8/27Release cadencea release every ~53.7 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releasesno data
Inputs used
releases_count53
latest_release_tagv26.08.00
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release7
mean_days_between_releases53.7
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

83Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
60/60Stars5,251 stars
23.4/25Forks651 forks
10.3/15Watchers71 watchers
Inputs used
forks651
stars5,251
watchers71
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5Licenserecognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges0
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

87Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
45.9/54Bus factor5 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
18.9/22.5Commit distributiontop contributor authored 16% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth100 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributorsproject has 33 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor5
contributors_sampled100
top_contributor_share0.162
How it's scored
31.7/42Issue resolution76% of issues closed
25.3/30PR acceptance4,364/5,168 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
15/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
Inputs used
merged_prs4,364
open_issues795
closed_issues2,452
prs_merged_7d11
prs_decided_7d11
prs_merged_30d32
prs_decided_30d34
issue_closed_ratio0.755
closed_unmerged_prs804
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backingorganization-owned
0/20Verified domainverified-domain status not read for this organization
25/25Owner reach28,897 followers of NVIDIA
25/25Track record789 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers28,897
owner_typeOrganization
is_verified
owner_loginNVIDIA
public_repos789
account_age_days5,207
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

96Exceptional · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows8 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

100Exceptional
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage sitehttps://docs.nvidia.com/cuml/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics5 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsmachine-learning-algorithms, machine-learning, cuda, gpu, nvidia
has_wikiyes
homepagehttps://docs.nvidia.com/cuml/
docs_sitehttps://docs.nvidia.com/cuml/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

67Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protectionno data
2.5/2.5CI-Tests28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7.5/7.5Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
2.5/2.5Contributorsproject has 33 contributing companies or organizations
0/10Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0/5Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5Licenselicense file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
0/5Packagingno data
0/5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releasesno data
7.5/7.5Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated15
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive3
scorecard_aggregate5.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Branch-Protection, Packaging, Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisoriesno direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisoriestransitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstandingno advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages47
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 1 resolved dependencies against OSV. 47 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

73Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructionscpp/agents.md, python/agents.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history94 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url
legible_history_share0.94
agent_instruction_filescpp/agents.md, python/agents.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes16,045
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrapdocs/Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environmentdevcontainer, Dockerfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practiceno agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenanceno automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesdocs/Makefile
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable codePython without a type-check config
54.3/55Manageable file sizes7/553 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes1,260,083
source_files_sampled553
oversized_source_files7
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto)not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP servernot applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examplesexamples, notebooks, recipes
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks, recipes
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files
interfaces_expected_of
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

5,251GitHub stars
100contributors
812commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
53releases
5bus factor
795open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • First-time contributor figures cover 12 of 16 authors (cap 12)
  • pypi package 'cuml' points at a different repository (https://github.com/rapidsai/dask-cuda); excluded from ecosystem scoring
  • Could not fetch pypi package 'libcuml' from its registry

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 651 ⇿
0Stars
651Forks
53Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

012525037550062575064882018-102022-092026-08
Major 0Minor 36Patch 12

Each point covers 8 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.9 / 10
5.9aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-08-12 23:00 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
n/aBranch-Protectioninternal error: error during branchesHandler.setup: internal error: some github tokens can't read classic branch protection rules: https://github.com/ossf/scorecard-action/blob/main/docs/authentication/fine-grained-auth-token.md
10CI-Tests28 out of 28 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
10Code-Reviewall changesets reviewed
10Contributorsproject has 33 contributing companies or organizations
0Dangerous-Workflowdangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 8 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
n/aPackagingpackaging workflow not detected
0Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
10Token-PermissionsGitHub workflow tokens follow principle of least privilege
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 25
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIcuda-bindings>=13.0.1,<14.0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIcuda-toolkit==13.*python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIcudf==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIcupy-cuda13x>=14.0.1,!=14.1.0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIjoblib>=0.11python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIlibcuml==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPInumba-cuda>=0.22.2python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPInumba>=0.60.0,<0.65.0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPInumpy>=2.0,<3.0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPInvforest==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPInvidia-nvjitlink>=13.3,<14python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIpackagingpython/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIpylibraft==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIrichpython/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIrmm==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIscikit-learn>=1.6python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIscipy>=1.14.0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPItreelite>=4.7.0,<5.0.0python/cuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIcuda-toolkit==13.*python/libcuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIlibcuvs==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/libcuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIlibnvforest==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/libcuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIlibraft==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/libcuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIlibrmm==26.10.*,>=0.0.0a0python/libcuml/pyproject.toml
PyPInvidia-nvjitlink>=13.3,<14python/libcuml/pyproject.toml
PyPIrapids-logger==0.3.*python/libcuml/pyproject.toml
All dependencies 48

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 26 direct and 22 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIcuda-bindingsdirect
PyPIcuda-toolkitdirect
PyPIcudfdirect
PyPIcudf24.6.*direct
PyPIcupy-cuda13xdirect
PyPIjoblibdirect
PyPIlibcumldirect
PyPIlibcuvsdirect
PyPIlibnvforestdirect
PyPIlibraftdirect
PyPIlibrmmdirect
PyPInumbadirect
PyPInumba-cudadirect
PyPInumpydirect
PyPInvforestdirect
PyPInvidia-nvjitlinkdirect
PyPIpackagingdirect
PyPIpylibraftdirect
PyPIpylibraft24.6.*direct
PyPIrapids-loggerdirect
PyPIrmmdirect
PyPIrmm24.6.*direct
PyPIscikit-learndirect
PyPIscipydirect
PyPItreelitedirect
PyPItreelite4.1.2direct
PyPIcupy-cuda11xindirect
PyPIcythonindirect
PyPIdask-cudaindirect
PyPIdask-cuda24.6.*indirect
PyPIdask-cudfindirect
PyPIdask-cudf24.6.*indirect
PyPIdask-mlindirect
PyPIhdbscanindirect
PyPIhypothesisindirect
PyPIipythonindirect
PyPInumpydocindirect
PyPInvidia-ml-pyindirect
PyPIraft-daskindirect
PyPIraft-dask24.6.*indirect
PyPIrapids-build-backendindirect
PyPIrapids-dask-dependencyindirect
PyPIrapids-dask-dependency24.6.*indirect
PyPIscikit-build-coreindirect
PyPIsphinxindirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-themeindirect
PyPIumap-learnindirect
PyPIxgboostindirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 1 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 47 could not be assessed — no resolved version, an unsupported ecosystem, or beyond the reported package list.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.31.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statisticsPyPI.