Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-08 22:46 UTC

intel / auto-round

A SOTA quantization toolkit for high-accuracy low-bit LLM inference|简洁且高效的量化工具包

Python · C++Apache-2.0★ 1,609 stars⑂ 175 forkssince Jan 2024View on GitHub ↗
KindCommand-line toolLibraryhow this is determined

intel/auto-round holds a health index of 95 out of 100, placing it in the Exceptional band. It scores highest on Vitality (99/100) and lowest on Security (60/100). It was last updated today. 3 contributors account for most of its recent work.

95
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.

95
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 82 is calibrated to 95 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

5,563 followers1,356 public repossince Mar 2016

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIauto-round-lib0.15.016,0413210 days agoquantizationauto-aroundllmkernel

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

99Exceptional · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
35.3/36Commit cadence — 51/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 783 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — no data
Inputs used
commits_last_year783
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year51

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 38 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 8 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~20.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count38
latest_release_tagv0.15.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release8
mean_days_between_releases20.6

Community & Adoption

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

80Excellent · 17% of overall
How it's scored
52/60Stars — 1,609 stars
18.7/25Forks — 175 forks
6.5/15Watchers — 16 watchers
Inputs used
forks175
stars1,609
watchers16
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

92Excellent
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
18/18CONTRIBUTING guide
13.5/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
6.3/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges5
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductyes
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateyes
How it's scored
56.1/80Monthly downloads — 16,041 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesauto-round-lib
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads16,041
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?

80Excellent · 23% of overall
How it's scored
36/54Bus factor — 3 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
15.9/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 29% of commits
13.5/13.5Contributor breadth — 40 contributors
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — no data
Inputs used
bus_factor3
contributors_sampled40
top_contributor_share0.294
How it's scored
37.4/42Issue resolution — 89% of issues closed
25.9/30PR acceptance — 1,342/1,554 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 0/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — no data
Inputs used
merged_prs1,342
open_issues81
closed_issues657
prs_merged_7d25
prs_decided_7d37
prs_merged_30d41
prs_decided_30d55
issue_closed_ratio0.89
closed_unmerged_prs212
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
0/20Verified domain
25/25Owner reach — 5,563 followers of intel
25/25Track record — 1,356 public repos, account ~10 yr old
Inputs used
followers5,563
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedno
owner_loginintel
public_repos1,356
account_age_days3,828

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 10 days ago
20/20Version history — 32 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesauto-round-lib
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish10

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

89Excellent · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 5 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black], [tool.isort])
9.6/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — no data
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configyes

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 13 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsint4, quantization, rounding, transformers, vllm, mxfp4, nvfp4, gguf, sglang, llms, vlms, diffusers, omni
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

60Moderate · 16% of overall
How it's scored
30/30Security policy (SECURITY.md)
0/25Dependabot config
0/25Dependency lockfiles
20/20CodeQL workflow
Inputs used
sourcefile_signals
lockfiles—
manifestspyproject.toml, requirements-cpu.txt, requirements-hpu.txt, requirements.txt, setup.cfg, setup.py
has_codeql_workflowyes
has_security_policyyes
has_dependabot_configno

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages30
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:auto-round-lib@0.15.0 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 30 packages. 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.

72Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — .github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://docs.sglang.io/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 89 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://docs.sglang.io/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.89
agent_instruction_files.github/copilot-instructions.md, AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes4,205
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff], [tool.black], [tool.isort])
0/11Static type checking
0/10Reproducible environment
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 10 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — no data
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfiles—
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.1
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
0/45Type-checkable code — Python without a type-check config
52.5/55Manageable file sizes — 37/829 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes1,930,927
source_files_sampled829
oversized_source_files37
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
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
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

1,609GitHub stars
40contributors
783commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
38releases
3bus factor
81open 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 17 authors (cap 12)
  • OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (killed by SIGKILL — most likely the container's memory limit; 2026/09/08 22:43:11 Warning: PATs stored in env variables GITHUB_AUTH_TOKEN and GITHUB_TOKEN differ. Scorecard will use the former.); skipping Scorecard checks

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 175 ⇿
0Stars
175Forks
38Releases

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.

0408012016020017572024-022025-052026-09
Major 0Minor 10Patch 24

Each point covers 3 days.

All dependencies 42

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 0 direct and 42 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIaccelerate—indirect
PyPIaddict—indirect
PyPIauto-round-lib—indirect
PyPIbitsandbytes—indirect
PyPIclip—indirect
PyPIcompressed-tensors—indirect
PyPIdatasets—indirect
PyPIdiffusers—indirect
PyPIeinops—indirect
PyPIflash-attn—indirect
PyPIgguf—indirect
PyPIgptqmodel—indirect
PyPIimage-reward—indirect
PyPIllmcompressor—indirect
PyPIlm-eval—indirect
PyPImodelscope—indirect
PyPIneural-compressor-pt—indirect
PyPInumba—indirect
PyPInumpy—indirect
PyPIoptimum—indirect
PyPIpackaging—indirect
PyPIpandas—indirect
PyPIparameterized—indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIprotobuf—indirect
PyPIpy-cpuinfo—indirect
PyPIpydantic—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIray—indirect
PyPIsentencepiece—indirect
PyPIsetuptools—indirect
PyPIsglang—indirect
PyPItbb—indirect
PyPItiktoken—indirect
PyPItimm—indirect
PyPItorch—indirect
PyPItorchvision—indirect
PyPItqdm—indirect
PyPItransformers—indirect
PyPItriton—indirect
PyPIvllm—indirect
PyPIxformers—indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:auto-round-lib@0.15.0 pulls in 30 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

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.