Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-12 08:41 UTC

ashvardanian / NumKong

SIMD-accelerated distances, dot products, matrix ops, geospatial & geometric kernels for 16 numeric types — from 6-bit floats to 64-bit complex — across x86, Arm, RISC-V, and WASM, with bindings for Python, Rust, C, C++, Swift, JS, and Go 📐

C · C++Apache-2.0★ 1,883 stars⑂ 130 forkssince Mar 2023View on GitHub ↗

KindLibraryhow this is determined

#arm-neon #assembly #metrics #simd #information-retrieval #numpy #scipy #vector-search #blas #matrix-multiplication #rust #tensor #cpp #golang #javascript #swift

ashvardanian/NumKong holds a health index of 88 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Vitality (88/100) and lowest on Security (62/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

overall / 100

Excellent

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.

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)

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 74 is calibrated to 88 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Ash VardanianPersonal account

1,446 followers61 public repossince Jul 2012BDFL @ Unum

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

Registry	Package	Version	Downloads / mo	Versions	Last publish	Tags
Go	github.com/ashvardanian/NumKong	v2.4.0+incompatible	-	32	1061 days ago	—
crates.io	numkong	7.8.2	45,468	22	10 days ago	linear-algebra search simd vector external-ffi-bindings hardware-support no-std mathematics wasm
npm	numkong	7.8.2	2,247	13	10 days ago	vector distance similarity search ai math avx2 avx512 neon sve arm x86 simd f16

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

88Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

86Excellent

How it's scored

36/36	Push recency — last push 1 days ago
21.5/36	Commit cadence — 31/52 weeks with commits
18/18	Commit volume — 1,452 commits in the last year
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10

Inputs used

commits_last_year	1,452
human_commit_share	1
days_since_last_push	1
active_weeks_last_year	31

Release discipline

90Excellent

How it's scored

27/27	Ships releases — 100 releases published
36/36	Release recency — latest release 10 days ago
27/27	Release cadence — a release every ~16.6 days
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.

Inputs used

releases_count	100
latest_release_tag	v7.8.2
releases_from_tags	no
days_since_latest_release	10
mean_days_between_releases	16.6

Community & Adoption

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

80Excellent · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

78Good

How it's scored

53.1/60	Stars — 1,883 stars
17.6/25	Forks — 130 forks
7.6/15	Watchers — 24 watchers

Inputs used

forks	130
stars	1,883
watchers	24
growth_state	unverified
growth_factor_pct	100
growth_unverified_reason	no_history

Community health

85Excellent

How it's scored

22.5/22.5	README
22.5/22.5	License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18	CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5	Code of conduct
0/7.2	Issue template
0/6.3	PR template

Inputs used

has_readme	yes
has_license	yes
readme_badges	0
has_contributing	yes
has_issue_template	no
has_code_of_conduct	yes
readme_badge_services	—
has_pull_request_template	no

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

78Good

How it's scored

62.4/80	Monthly downloads — 47,715 downloads/month across crates, go, npm
0/20	Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem

Inputs used

packages	github.com/ashvardanian/NumKong, numkong, numkong
dependents	—
ecosystems	crates, go, npm
total_downloads	188,645
monthly_downloads	47,715
unverified_packages_excluded	—

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

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

67Good · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

34At Risk

How it's scored

9/54	Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
1.4/22.5	Commit distribution — top contributor authored 94% of commits
13.5/13.5	Contributor breadth — 47 contributors
10/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations

Inputs used

bus_factor	1
contributors_sampled	47
top_contributor_share	0.936

Issue & PR responsiveness

75Good

How it's scored

32.3/42	Issue resolution — 77% of issues closed
27.8/30	PR acceptance — 193/208 decided PRs merged
13/13	Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
1.5/15	OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 1/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1

Inputs used

merged_prs	193
open_issues	39
closed_issues	129
prs_merged_7d	0
prs_decided_7d	0
prs_merged_30d	3
prs_decided_30d	4
issue_closed_ratio	0.768
closed_unmerged_prs	15
first_time_authors_30d	1
first_time_prs_merged_30d	1
first_time_prs_decided_30d	1

Ownership & stewardship

72Good

How it's scored

10/30	Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20	Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
22.7/25	Owner reach — 1,446 followers of ashvardanian
25/25	Track record — 61 public repos, account ~14 yr old

Inputs used

followers	1,446
owner_type	User
is_verified	—
owner_login	ashvardanian
public_repos	61
account_age_days	5,170

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional

How it's scored

25/25	Published & resolvable — 3 package(s) on crates, go, npm
35/35	Publish recency — latest publish 10 days ago
20/20	Version history — 32 published versions
20/20	Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked

Inputs used

packages	github.com/ashvardanian/NumKong, numkong, numkong
ecosystems	crates, go, npm
any_deprecated	no
min_days_since_publish	10

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

76Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

84Excellent

How it's scored

24/24	CI workflows — 14 workflow(s)
24/24	Tests present
16/16	Linter config — package.json ("prettier"), pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black]), rustfmt.toml
0/9.6	Pre-commit hooks
6.4/6.4	.editorconfig
14/20	OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 3 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7

Inputs used

has_ci	yes
has_tests	yes
has_editorconfig	yes
has_linter_config	yes
has_precommit_config	no

Documentation

65Good

How it's scored

30/30	README
0/25	Documentation directory
15/15	Documentation / homepage site — https://ashvardanian.com/posts/numkong
10/10	Repository description
10/10	Topics — 16 topics
0/10	Wiki

Inputs used

topics	arm-neon, assembly, metrics, simd, information-retrieval, numpy, scipy, vector-search, blas, matrix-multiplication, rust, tensor, cpp, golang, javascript, swift
has_wiki	no
homepage	https://ashvardanian.com/posts/numkong
docs_site	https://ashvardanian.com/posts/numkong
has_readme	yes
has_docs_dir	no
has_description	yes

Security

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

62Moderate · 16% of overall

Security posture

52Moderate

How it's scored

7.5/7.5	Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5	Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
1.8/2.5	CI-Tests — 3 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0/2.5	CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0.8/7.5	Code-Review — Found 1/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
2.5/2.5	Contributors — project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10/10	Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5	Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5	Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5	License — license file detected
7.5/7.5	Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5	Packaging — packaging workflow detected
0/5	Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0/5	SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5	Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5	Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5	Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5	Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Inputs used

source	openssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated	18
scorecard_version	v5.5.0
checks_inconclusive	0
scorecard_aggregate	5.2

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional

How it's scored

35/35	Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25	Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40	No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date

Inputs used

source	osv
advisories	0
affected_packages	0
assessed_packages	6
unassessed_packages	21
affected_by_severity	none
direct_affected_packages	0

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 6 resolved dependencies against OSV. 21 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.

63Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

55Moderate

How it's scored

0/45	Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15	Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://ashvardanian.com/llms.txt)
40/40	Legible commit history — 79 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)

Inputs used

has_llms_txt	yes
llms_txt_url	https://ashvardanian.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share	0.79
agent_instruction_files	—
agent_instruction_max_bytes	—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

57Moderate

How it's scored

12.6/18	One-command bootstrap — Cargo.toml, go.mod (toolchain convention, no task runner)
22/22	Automated tests
11/11	Lint / format config — package.json ("prettier"), pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black]), rustfmt.toml
11/11	Static type checking — .vscode/pyrightconfig.json, python/numkong/py.typed
0/10	Reproducible environment
0/10	Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8	Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10	OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0

Inputs used

has_nix	no
has_tests	yes
lockfiles	—
has_dockerfile	no
typed_language	yes
bootstrap_files	—
has_devcontainer	no
has_linter_config	yes
typecheck_configs	.vscode/pyrightconfig.json, python/numkong/py.typed
agent_commit_share	0
toolchain_manifests	Cargo.toml, go.mod
dependency_bot_commit_share	0

Code legibility for models

94Exceptional

How it's scored

45/45	Type-checkable code — C (statically typed)
49.3/55	Manageable file sizes — 48/465 source files over 60KB

Inputs used

primary_language	C
largest_source_bytes	317,645
source_files_sampled	465
oversized_source_files	48

Key facts

1,883GitHub stars

47contributors

1,452commits, last 12 months

1days since last push

100releases

1bus factor

39open issues

crates.io, Go, npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 130 ⇿

0Stars

130Forks

100Releases

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.

Major 2Minor 20Patch 78

Each point covers 4 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 5.2 / 10

5.2aggregate

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 · 2026-09-12 08:41 UTC

10	Binary-Artifacts	no binaries found in the repo
3	Branch-Protection	branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
7	CI-Tests	3 out of 4 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 7
0	CII-Best-Practices	no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
1	Code-Review	Found 1/8 approved changesets -- score normalized to 1
10	Contributors	project has 11 contributing companies or organizations
10	Dangerous-Workflow	no dangerous workflow patterns detected
10	Dependency-Update-Tool	update tool detected
0	Fuzzing	project is not fuzzed
10	License	license file detected
10	Maintained	30 commit(s) and 4 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10	Packaging	packaging workflow detected
0	Pinned-Dependencies	dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 0
0	SAST	SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0	Security-Policy	security policy file not detected
0	Signed-Releases	Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0	Token-Permissions	detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10	Vulnerabilities	0 existing vulnerabilities detected

Direct dependencies 4

Registry	Package	Version constraint	Manifest
crates.io	fork_union	`2.3`	Cargo.toml
npm	bindings	`^1.5.0`	package.json
npm	node-addon-api	`^8.5.0`	package.json
npm	node-gyp-build	`^4.8.4`	package.json

All dependencies 27

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 4 direct and 23 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

Registry	Package	Version	Relation
crates.io	fork_union	`—`	direct
npm	bindings	`^1.5.0`	direct
npm	node-addon-api	`^8.5.0`	direct
npm	node-gyp-build	`^4.8.4`	direct
crates.io	cc	`—`	indirect
crates.io	half	`—`	indirect
crates.io	rand	`—`	indirect
crates.io	wasmtime	`—`	indirect
crates.io	wasmtime-wasi	`—`	indirect
npm	@numkong/darwin-arm64	`7.8.2`	indirect
npm	@numkong/darwin-x64	`7.8.2`	indirect
npm	@numkong/linux-arm64	`7.8.2`	indirect
npm	@numkong/linux-x64	`7.8.2`	indirect
npm	@numkong/win32-arm64	`7.8.2`	indirect
npm	@numkong/win32-x64	`7.8.2`	indirect
npm	@playwright/test	`^1.58.0`	indirect
npm	@types/bindings	`^1.5.5`	indirect
npm	@types/node	`^24.10.0`	indirect
npm	benchmark	`^2.1.4`	indirect
npm	esbuild	`^0.25.0`	indirect
npm	http-server	`^14.1.1`	indirect
npm	mathjs	`^14.9.0`	indirect
npm	node-gyp	`^13.0.1`	indirect
npm	playwright	`^1.58.0`	indirect
npm	typescript	`^5.9.3`	indirect
npm	usearch	`^2.21.0`	indirect
PyPI	setuptools	`—`	indirect

Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 6 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct. 21 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.

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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — Go, crates.io, npm.

Software health index

Score profile

Ownership

Package ecosystems

Metrics by category

Key facts

Data collection warnings

More detail

Feedback

Related records