Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-23 19:37 UTC

brian-team / brian2

Brian is a free, open source simulator for spiking neural networks.

PythonCustom license★ 1,247 stars⑂ 306 forkssince Nov 2012View on GitHub ↗

brian-team/brian2 holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (86/100) and lowest on AI Readiness (63/100). It was last updated today. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

91
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.

91
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 77 is calibrated to 91 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

Brian simulatorOrganization · verified domain
98 followers29 public repossince Sep 2012

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIBrian22.11.026,091550 days agocomputational-neurosciencesimulationneural-networksspiking-neuronsbiological-neural-networksresearch

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

83Excellent · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
27/36Commit cadence — 39/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 426 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year426
human_commit_share0.9
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year39
How it's scored
16.2/27Ships releases — 21 version tags (no GitHub releases)
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
12.6/27Release cadence — a release every ~134.8 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count21
latest_release_tag2.11.0
releases_from_tagsyes
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases134.8
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?

71Good · 17% of overall
How it's scored
50.2/60Stars — 1,247 stars
20.7/25Forks — 306 forks
9.2/15Watchers — 46 watchers
Inputs used
forks306
stars1,247
watchers46
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges18
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, readthedocs.org, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
58.9/80Monthly downloads — 26,091 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesBrian2
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads26,091
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?

73Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.6/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 70% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 78 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 30 contributing companies or organizations
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled78
top_contributor_share0.705
How it's scored
33.1/42Issue resolution — 79% of issues closed
26.6/30PR acceptance — 876/988 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 10/10 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
6/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 9/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
Inputs used
merged_prs876
open_issues188
closed_issues701
prs_merged_7d4
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d18
prs_decided_30d19
issue_closed_ratio0.789
closed_unmerged_prs112
first_time_authors_30d6
first_time_prs_merged_30d10
first_time_prs_decided_30d10
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
14.3/25Owner reach — 98 followers of brian-team
22.8/25Track record — 29 public repos, account ~14 yr old
Inputs used
followers98
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginbrian-team
public_repos29
account_age_days5,160

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 0 days ago
20/20Version history — 55 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesBrian2
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

86Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 7 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
20/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 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
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — http://briansimulator.org
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 11 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicspython, neuroscience, science, differential-equations, spiking-neural-networks, biological-simulations, code-generation, simulation-framework, brian, computational-neuroscience, brian2
has_wikiyes
homepagehttp://briansimulator.org
docs_sitehttp://briansimulator.org
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

75Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
4.5/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0.5/2.5CII-Best-Practices — badge detected: InProgress
3/7.5Code-Review — Found 9/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 30 contributing companies or organizations
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
2.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
6/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6/7.5Vulnerabilities — 2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.9
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages1
unassessed_packages19
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. 19 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
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
28.4/40Legible commit history — 48 of 90 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.533
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — brian2/devices/cpp_standalone/templates/makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
0/11Static type checking
10/10Reproducible environment — devcontainer, Dockerfile
4/10Demonstrated agent practice — 2 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 10 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
5/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileyes
typed_languageno
bootstrap_filesbrian2/devices/cpp_standalone/templates/makefile
has_devcontaineryes
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.02
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.1
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
53.2/55Manageable file sizes — 11/343 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes260,561
source_files_sampled343
oversized_source_files11
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples, notebooks
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples, notebooks
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

1,247GitHub stars
78contributors
426commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
21releases
1bus factor
188open issues
PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
  • deps.dev does not index pypi:Brian2@2.11.0; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 306 ⇿
0Stars
306Forks
20Releases

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.

012525037530372013-012019-122026-10
Major 0Minor 5Patch 15

Each point covers 13 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.9 / 10
6.9aggregate

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 · 2026-10-23 19:37 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
6Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests11 out of 11 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
2CII-Best-Practicesbadge detected: InProgress
4Code-ReviewFound 9/20 approved changesets -- score normalized to 4
10Contributorsproject has 30 contributing companies or organizations
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 2 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
5Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 5
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
8Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
8Vulnerabilities2 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 8
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPInumpy>=2.3.0pyproject.toml
PyPIcython>=0.29.21pyproject.toml
PyPIsympy>=1.2pyproject.toml
PyPIpyparsing>=3,!=3.2.4pyproject.toml
PyPIjinja2>=2.7pyproject.toml
PyPIpy-cpuinfo—pyproject.toml
PyPIsetuptools>=61pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging—pyproject.toml
All dependencies 20

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 6 direct and 14 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIcython—direct
PyPIjinja2—direct
PyPInumpy—direct
PyPIpyparsing—direct
PyPIsetuptools—direct
PyPIsympy—direct
PyPIipympl—indirect
PyPIipython—indirect
PyPIjupyterlab—indirect
PyPImatplotlib—indirect
PyPIpre-commit—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov—indirect
PyPIpytest-xdist—indirect
PyPIruff0.14.2indirect
PyPIscipy—indirect
PyPIsetuptools-scm—indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme—indirect
PyPIsphinx-tabs—indirect
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. 19 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 v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.