Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-10-04 04:48 UTC

nstarman / quax

Multiple dispatch over abstract array types in JAX.

PythonApache-2.0★ 143 stars⑂ 7 forkssince Jun 2023View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryhow this is determined
#equinox#jax#multiple-dispatch#python-typing#typing

nstarman/quax holds a health index of 91 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (92/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (60/100). 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

Nathaniel StarkmanPersonal account
85 followers144 public repossince Sep 2014MIT

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

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
PyPIquax0.4.418,383240 days agoequinoxjaxmultiple-dispatch

Metrics by category

Vitality

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

89Excellent · 21% of overall

Development activity

82Excellent
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 0 days ago
18/36Commit cadence — 26/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 152 commits in the last year
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
commits_last_year152
human_commit_share0.79
days_since_last_push0
active_weeks_last_year26

Release discipline

100Exceptional
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 21 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 0 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~11.5 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count21
latest_release_tagv0.4.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release0
mean_days_between_releases11.5
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?

60Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

44Weak
How it's scored
34.9/60Stars — 143 stars
6.5/25Forks — 7 forks
2.7/15Watchers — 4 watchers
Inputs used
forks7
stars143
watchers4
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

70Good
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized 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_badges9
has_contributingyes
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesgithub.com, shields.io
has_pull_request_templateno

Ecosystem adoption (downloads)

71Good
How it's scored
56.9/80Monthly downloads — 18,383 downloads/month across pypi
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesquax
dependents—
ecosystemspypi
total_downloads—
monthly_downloads18,383
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?

64Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

34At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 71% of commits
8.1/13.5Contributor breadth — 6 contributors
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled6
top_contributor_share0.711

Issue & PR responsiveness

73Good
How it's scored
36.2/42Issue resolution — 86% of issues closed
27.4/30PR acceptance — 215/235 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs215
open_issues4
closed_issues25
prs_merged_7d10
prs_decided_7d10
prs_merged_30d18
prs_decided_30d18
issue_closed_ratio0.862
closed_unmerged_prs20
first_time_authors_30d0
first_time_prs_merged_30d0
first_time_prs_decided_30d0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

61Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
13.9/25Owner reach — 85 followers of nstarman
25/25Track record — 144 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers85
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginnstarman
public_repos144
account_age_days4,388
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

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 — 24 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesquax
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish0

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

92Excellent · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

94Exceptional
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 6 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 — 30 out of 30 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

90Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://nstarman.github.io/quax/
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 5 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsequinox, jax, multiple-dispatch, python-typing, typing
has_wikino
homepagehttps://nstarman.github.io/quax/
docs_sitehttps://nstarman.github.io/quax/
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

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

78Good · 16% of overall

Security posture

72Good
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
2.2/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
2.5/2.5CI-Tests — 30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
2.5/2.5Contributors — project has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
7.5/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
7.5/7.5Maintained — 30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
5/5SAST — SAST tool is run on all commits
2/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
6.8/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
4.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate7.2
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
advisories4
affected_packages2
assessed_packages102
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severityhigh 2
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 102 resolved dependencies against OSV. 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.

86Excellent · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

85Excellent
How it's scored
45/45Agent instructions — AGENTS.md
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 78 of 79 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.987
agent_instruction_filesAGENTS.md
agent_instruction_max_bytes5,907

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

82Excellent
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — pyproject.toml ([tool.ruff])
11/11Static type checking — src/quax/py.typed
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
10/10Demonstrated agent practice — 57 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
8/8Automated maintenance — 20 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesuv.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configssrc/quax/py.typed
agent_commit_share0.57
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0.2

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/quax/py.typed)
55/55Manageable file sizes — 0/83 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes46,567
source_files_sampled83
oversized_source_files0

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
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

143GitHub stars
6contributors
152commits, last 12 months
0days since last push
21releases
1bus factor
4open 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:quax@0.4.4; advisories assessed against the repository dependency graph instead

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 7 ⇿
0Stars
7Forks
5Releases

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.

1234567712024-042025-042026-04
Major 0Minor 2Patch 3

Each point covers 2 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 7.2 / 10
7.2aggregate

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 · 2026-10-04 04:47 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
3Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
10CI-Tests30 out of 30 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 10
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/23 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
10Contributorsproject has 3 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 10
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
10Dependency-Update-Toolupdate tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
10Maintained30 commit(s) and 6 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 10
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
10SASTSAST tool is run on all commits
4Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
9Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
6Vulnerabilities4 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 6
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIjax>=0.7.2pyproject.toml
PyPIjaxtyping>=0.3.3pyproject.toml
PyPIequinox>=0.13.3pyproject.toml
PyPIplum-dispatch>=2.5.7pyproject.toml
PyPIplum-dispatch>=2.9.0pyproject.toml
PyPIpackaging>=20.0pyproject.toml
All dependencies 102

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 5 direct and 97 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
PyPIequinox0.13.8direct
PyPIjax0.10.2direct
PyPIjaxtyping0.3.11direct
PyPIpackaging26.3direct
PyPIplum-dispatch2.10.1direct
PyPIappnope0.1.4indirect
PyPIasttokens3.0.1indirect
PyPIattrs26.1.0indirect
PyPIbeartype0.22.9indirect
PyPIbeautifulsoup44.14.3indirect
PyPIbleach6.4.0indirect
PyPIcffi2.0.0indirect
PyPIclick8.3.1indirect
PyPIcolorama0.4.6indirect
PyPIcomm0.2.3indirect
PyPIdebugpy1.8.20indirect
PyPIdecorator5.2.1indirect
PyPIdeepmerge2.0indirect
PyPIdefusedxml0.7.1indirect
PyPIdiffrax0.7.2indirect
PyPIexecuting2.2.1indirect
PyPIfastjsonschema2.21.2indirect
PyPIghp-import2.1.0indirect
PyPIgriffe1.15.0indirect
PyPIhippogriffe0.2.2indirect
PyPIiniconfig2.3.0indirect
PyPIipykernel7.3.0indirect
PyPIipython9.10.1indirect
PyPIipython9.12.0indirect
PyPIipython-pygments-lexers1.1.1indirect
PyPIjaxlib0.10.2indirect
PyPIjedi0.19.2indirect
PyPIjinja23.1.6indirect
PyPIjsonschema4.26.0indirect
PyPIjsonschema-specifications2025.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-client8.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyter-core5.9.1indirect
PyPIjupyterlab-pygments0.3.0indirect
PyPIlineax0.1.1indirect
PyPImarkdown3.10indirect
PyPImarkdown-it-py4.0.0indirect
PyPImarkupsafe3.0.3indirect
PyPImatplotlib-inline0.2.1indirect
PyPImdurl0.1.2indirect
PyPImergedeep1.3.4indirect
PyPImistune3.3.3indirect
PyPImkdocs1.6.1indirect
PyPImkdocs-autorefs1.4.3indirect
PyPImkdocs-get-deps0.2.0indirect
PyPImkdocstrings1.0.6indirect
PyPImkdocstrings-python1.16.12indirect
PyPIml-dtypes0.5.4indirect
PyPInbclient0.10.4indirect
PyPInbconvert7.17.1indirect
PyPInbformat5.10.4indirect
PyPInest-asyncio21.7.2indirect
PyPInumpy2.3.5indirect
PyPIopt-einsum3.4.0indirect
PyPIoptimistix0.1.0indirect
PyPIpandocfilters1.5.1indirect
PyPIparso0.8.6indirect
PyPIpathspec1.1.1indirect
PyPIpexpect4.9.0indirect
PyPIplatformdirs4.5.0indirect
PyPIpluggy1.6.0indirect
PyPIprek0.5.4indirect
PyPIprompt-toolkit3.0.52indirect
PyPIpsutil7.2.2indirect
PyPIptyprocess0.7.0indirect
PyPIpure-eval0.2.3indirect
PyPIpy-cpuinfo210.1.1indirect
PyPIpycparser3.0indirect
PyPIpygments2.20.0indirect
PyPIpymdown-extensions12.1indirect
PyPIpytest9.1.1indirect
PyPIpytest-benchmark5.3.0indirect
PyPIpytest-codspeed5.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-env1.7.1indirect
PyPIpython-dateutil2.9.0.post0indirect
PyPIpython-dotenv1.2.2indirect
PyPIpyyaml6.0.3indirect
PyPIpyyaml-env-tag1.1indirect
PyPIpyzmq27.1.0indirect
PyPIreferencing0.37.0indirect
PyPIrich14.2.0indirect
PyPIrpds-py0.30.0indirect
PyPIruff0.16.9indirect
PyPIscipy1.16.3indirect
PyPIsix1.17.0indirect
PyPIsoupsieve2.9indirect
PyPIstack-data0.6.3indirect
PyPIsybil10.1.0indirect
PyPItinycss21.4.0indirect
PyPItomli2.4.1indirect
PyPItornado6.5.8indirect
PyPItraitlets5.14.3indirect
PyPItyping-extensions4.15.0indirect
PyPIwadler-lindig0.1.7indirect
PyPIwatchdog6.0.0indirect
PyPIwcwidth0.6.0indirect
PyPIwebencodings0.5.1indirect
PyPIzensical0.0.66indirect
Dependency advisories 2

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 102 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 2 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

PackageVersionRelationSeverityAdvisoriesFixed in
click8.3.1indirecthigh18.3.3
tornado6.5.8indirecthigh36.5.9

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.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with nstarman/quax. Read them side by side →

83patrick-kidger/jaxtypingType annotations and runtime checking for shape and dtype of JAX/NumPy/PyTorch/etc. arrays. https://docs.kidger.site/jaxtyping/Excellent93scipy/scipy-stubsOfficial type stubs for SciPyExceptional91patrick-kidger/equinoxElegant easy-to-use neural networks + scientific computing in JAX. https://docs.kidger.site/equinox/Excellent90GalacticDynamics/coordinaxCoordinates in JAXExcellent90jorenham/optypeOpinionated typing package for precise type hints in PythonExcellent80patrick-kidger/diffraxNumerical differential equation solvers in JAX. Autodifferentiable and GPU-capable. https://docs.kidger.site/diffrax/Excellent

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.