# paiml/aprender — health index 84/100 (Excellent)

> Inspection of the public repository paiml/aprender by inspect.software. It holds a health index of 84 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. The index is a signal derived from publicly visible practice, not a warranty, a security audit, or an endorsement, and it is independent of payment.

- Repository: https://github.com/paiml/aprender
- Report page: https://inspect.software/software/paiml/aprender
- Full JSON report: https://inspect.software/api/repositories/paiml/aprender/report
- Badge: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/inspect-software/badges/main/v1/p/paiml/aprender.svg
- Inspected: 2026-07-28
- Methodology: metrics 2.5.0, report schema 0.27.0 (https://inspect.software/methodology.md)

## Category summary

| Category | Weight | Index | Band |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitality | 21% | 91/100 | Excellent |
| Community & Adoption | 17% | 57/100 | Moderate |
| Sustainability & Governance | 23% | 64/100 | Moderate |
| Engineering Quality | 19% | 100/100 | Exceptional |
| Security | 16% | 33/100 | At Risk |
| AI Readiness | 4% | 89/100 | Excellent |

The weighted overall 71 is calibrated to 84 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

## Repository facts

| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Description | Next Generation Machine Learning, Statistics and Deep Learning in PURE Rust |
| Classification | library |
| Homepage | https://paiml.github.io/aprender/ |
| Primary language | Rust |
| License | MIT |
| Stars | 110 |
| Forks | 21 |
| Created | 2025-11-18 |
| Last push | 2026-07-27 |
| Latest release | nightly |
| Commits (last year) | 3,828 |
| Bus factor | 1 |
| Topics | deep-learning, ml, models, rust, statistics, sovereign-ai, paiml-monorepo |

## Published packages

| Registry | Package | Latest | Monthly downloads |
|---|---|---|---|
| crates | aprender | 0.61.0 | 3,595 |

## Vitality — 91/100 (Excellent)

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping? Weight: 21% of the overall index.

### Development activity — 85/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Push recency | met | 36 / 36 | last push 0 days ago |
| Commit cadence | partial | 22.2 / 36 | 32/52 weeks with commits |
| Commit volume | met | 18 / 18 | 3828 commits in the last year |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained | excluded | 0 / 10 | OpenSSF Scorecard unavailable |

### Release discipline — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ships releases | met | 27 / 27 | 80 releases published |
| Release recency | met | 36 / 36 | latest release 0 days ago |
| Release cadence | met | 27 / 27 | a release every ~3.7 days |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases | excluded | 0 / 10 | OpenSSF Scorecard unavailable |

### Abandonment — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project is still maintained | met | 100 / 100 | last human commit 8 days ago |

## Community & Adoption — 57/100 (Moderate)

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors? Weight: 17% of the overall index.

### Popularity & adoption — 44/100 (Weak)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stars | partial | 33 / 60 | 110 stars |
| Forks | partial | 10.8 / 25 | 21 forks |
| Watchers | not met | 0 / 15 | 1 watchers |

### Community health — 70/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | — |
| License | met | 22.5 / 22.5 | recognized license (MIT) |
| CONTRIBUTING guide | met | 18 / 18 | — |
| Code of conduct | not met | 0 / 13.5 | — |
| Issue template | not met | 0 / 7.2 | — |
| PR template | not met | 0 / 6.3 | — |

### Ecosystem adoption (downloads) — 59/100 (Moderate)

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

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly downloads | partial | 47.4 / 80 | 3,595 downloads/month across crates |
| Registry dependents | excluded | 0 / 20 | not reported by this ecosystem |

## Sustainability & Governance — 64/100 (Moderate)

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep? Weight: 23% of the overall index.

### Maintainer resilience (bus factor) — 15/100 (Critical)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bus factor | partial | 9 / 54 | 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits |
| Commit distribution | partial | 0.1 / 22.5 | top contributor authored 100% of commits |
| Contributor breadth | partial | 4.1 / 13.5 | 3 contributors |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors | excluded | 0 / 10 | OpenSSF Scorecard unavailable |

### Issue & PR responsiveness — 87/100 (Excellent)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issue resolution | partial | 41.7 / 42 | 99% of issues closed |
| PR acceptance | partial | 20.8 / 30 | 1125/1624 decided PRs merged |
| Newcomer PR acceptance | excluded | 0 / 13 | no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review | excluded | 0 / 15 | OpenSSF Scorecard unavailable |

### Ownership & stewardship — 73/100 (Good)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership backing | met | 30 / 30 | organization-owned |
| Verified domain | not met | 0 / 20 | — |
| Owner reach | partial | 18 / 25 | 313 followers of paiml |
| Track record | met | 25 / 25 | 188 public repos, account ~9 yr old |

### Package maintenance — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published & resolvable | met | 25 / 25 | 1 package(s) on crates |
| Publish recency | met | 35 / 35 | latest publish 1 days ago |
| Version history | met | 20 / 20 | 79 published versions |
| Not deprecated | met | 20 / 20 | active, not deprecated or yanked |

## Engineering Quality — 100/100 (Exceptional)

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place? Weight: 19% of the overall index.

### Engineering practices — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI workflows | met | 24 / 24 | 11 workflow(s) |
| Tests present | met | 24 / 24 | — |
| Linter config | met | 16 / 16 | — |
| Pre-commit hooks | met | 9.6 / 9.6 | — |
| .editorconfig | met | 6.4 / 6.4 | — |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests | excluded | 0 / 20 | OpenSSF Scorecard unavailable |

### Documentation — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| README | met | 30 / 30 | — |
| Documentation directory | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Documentation / homepage site | met | 15 / 15 | https://paiml.github.io/aprender/ |
| Repository description | met | 10 / 10 | — |
| Topics | met | 10 / 10 | 7 topics |
| Wiki | met | 10 / 10 | — |

## Security — 33/100 (At Risk)

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, with no malicious dependency and no unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure? Weight: 16% of the overall index.

### Security posture — 33/100 (At Risk)

Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Dependency lockfiles. Remaining weights renormalized.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Security policy (SECURITY.md) | not met | 0 / 30 | — |
| Dependabot config | met | 25 / 25 | — |
| Dependency lockfiles | excluded | 0 / 25 | published library — lockfiles are an application concern, not expected |
| CodeQL workflow | not met | 0 / 20 | — |

### High-Risk Jurisdiction Exposure — 100/100 (Exceptional)

Only high-confidence self-published location evidence affects this multiplier. Ambiguous matches are review-only; country evidence is not proof of nationality, citizenship, legal registration, malicious intent, or sanctions status.

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Policy exposure multiplier | met | 100 / 100 | no confirmed policy-scope location match |

## AI Readiness — 89/100 (Excellent)

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight: agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but its absence must never gate the top of the scale (calibration saturates at raw 91, so 100/100 remains reachable with AI Readiness at zero).

### Agent context & guidance — 85/100 (Excellent)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agent instructions | met | 45 / 45 | CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-compute/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-contracts-staging/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-data/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-db/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-distribute/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-graph/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-orchestrate/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-present/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-profile/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-rag/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-registry/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-serve/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-simulate/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-test/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-train/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-verify-ml/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-verify/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-viz/CLAUDE.md, crates/aprender-zram/CLAUDE.md |
| Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) | not met | 0 / 15 | — |
| Legible commit history | met | 40 / 40 | 99 of 99 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body) |

### Verify loop (build / test / typecheck) — 100/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| One-command bootstrap | met | 18 / 18 | Makefile, crates/aprender-compute/justfile, crates/aprender-data/justfile, crates/aprender-db/justfile, crates/aprender-distribute/justfile, crates/aprender-graph/justfile, crates/aprender-orchestrate/justfile, crates/aprender-present/justfile, crates/aprender-profile/justfile, crates/aprender-rag/justfile, crates/aprender-registry/justfile, crates/aprender-serve/justfile, crates/aprender-simulate/mise.toml, crates/aprender-train/justfile, crates/aprender-verify/justfile, crates/aprender-viz/justfile, crates/aprender-zram/justfile |
| Automated tests | met | 22 / 22 | — |
| Lint / format config | met | 11 / 11 | — |
| Static type checking | met | 11 / 11 | Rust (statically typed) |
| Reproducible environment | met | 10 / 10 | devcontainer, Dockerfile, Nix, lockfile |
| Demonstrated agent practice | met | 10 / 10 | 86 of the last 100 commits agent-authored or agent-credited |
| Automated maintenance | met | 8 / 8 | 1 of the last 100 commits are automated dependency updates |
| OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies | excluded | 0 / 10 | OpenSSF Scorecard unavailable |

### Code legibility for models — 99/100 (Exceptional)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type-checkable code | met | 45 / 45 | Rust (statically typed) |
| Manageable file sizes | partial | 54.4 / 55 | 108/10102 source files over 60KB |

### Machine-readable interfaces — 60/100 (Moderate)

| Criterion | Status | Points | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) | not met | 0 / 40 | — |
| MCP server | met | 20 / 20 | — |
| Runnable examples | met | 40 / 40 | cookbook, demos, examples, recipes |

## Collection warnings

- Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token
- GitHub dependency-graph SBOM unavailable (404); the dependency graph may be disabled for this repository
- OpenSSF Scorecard did not return a usable result (exit code -9); skipping Scorecard checks

## What this report is

inspect.software measures public repositories against a single published, versioned methodology and reports the result as a 1–100 health index. Findings are signals derived from what is visible in public repository data — they are not a security audit, a warranty, or an endorsement, and no result depends on payment.

- Methodology, formulas and weights: https://inspect.software/methodology.md
- What a result does and does not claim: https://inspect.software/wiki/signals-not-warranties.md
- Rating bands: https://inspect.software/wiki/scoring-bands.md
- Corrections: https://inspect.software/contact.md
- Index of all documents: https://inspect.software/llms.txt