Leaderboard github.com
tyrantgit/ExplosionField
explosive dust effect for views
AI provenance
0%
none-detected
- Confidence
- 43%
- Coverage
- 100%
Estimated share of AI-generated code. Explicit attribution is a lower bound.
Code quality
63/100
weak
- Confidence
- 90%
- Coverage
- 100%
Complexity, duplication, lint density, tests, CI, docs and review process.
Security
75/100
adequate
- Confidence
- 85%
- Coverage
- 100%
Secrets, static analysis, vulnerable dependencies, CI and supply-chain posture.
AI provenance
0% none-detected
No AI attribution or AI-consistent velocity signals detected.
How the score is built
- Explicitly attributed share0%
- Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
- Estimated AI-generated share0%
- AI tool configuration files0
- Work sessions at AI pace0
- Releases at AI pacenot measured
- Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.00
Lines added per month all AI-attributed share
- 2015-09452 · 0% AI
- 2015-100 · 0% AI
Evidence by analyzer
Explicit AI attributionok
- attributed_commit_share
- 0.0%
- attributed_commits
- 0
- attributed_loc
- 0
- attributed_loc_share
- 0.0%
- commits
- 13
- effective_loc
- 452
- tools_detected
- 0
AI tool configurationok
- artifacts
- 0
- tools_configured
- 0
- workflow_agents
- 0
Commit velocityok
- excluded_import_loc
- 0
- flagged_loc
- 0
- flagged_loc_share
- 0.0%
- flagged_units
- 0
- max_loc_per_hour
- 100.50
- measured_loc
- 452
- median_loc_per_hour
- 100.50
- pr_timed_units
- 0
- pre_ai_era_burst_loc
- 0
- pre_ai_era_bursts
- 0
- pre_ai_era_measured_loc
- 452
- work_units
- 5
Release velocityskipped
Coding styleok
- count:assistant_voice
- 0
- count:emoji_in_code
- 0
- count:narrated_steps
- 0
- count:placeholder
- 0
- files:assistant_voice
- 0
- files:emoji_in_code
- 0
- files:narrated_steps
- 0
- files:placeholder
- 0
- index
- 0
- lines_scanned
- 421
- per_kloc:assistant_voice
- 0
- per_kloc:emoji_in_code
- 0
- per_kloc:narrated_steps
- 0
- per_kloc:placeholder
- 0
Code quality
63 weak
Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.06, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 12% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.
How the score is built
- Complexity100
- Duplication50
- Lint and smells100
- Tests and CI29
- Documentation40
- Type safetynot measured
- Review processnot measured
Evidence by analyzer
Complexity (lizard)ok
- complex_functions
- 0
- function_nloc
- 240
- functions
- 27
- long_functions
- 0
- many_param_functions
- 0
- mean_ccn
- 1.89
- p90_ccn
- 4
- risky_nloc_share
- 0.0%
Duplication (jscpd)ok1 item
- compared_lines
- 259
- duplicated_lines
- 30
- duplicated_share
- 11.6%
- files
- 4
Lintok
- findings
- 0
- scanned_lines
- 421
- weighted_findings
- 0
Tests and CIok
- check:ci_present
- no
- check:ci_runs_lint
- no
- check:ci_runs_tests
- no
- check:has_tests
- yes
- check:test_ratio
- no
- check:tests_cochange
- no
- ci_files
- 0
- cochange_commits
- 7
- cochange_share
- 14.3%
- source_lines
- 421
- test_lines
- 26
- test_ratio
- 0.06
Documentationok1 item
- README.md
README.md
- check:changelog
- no
- check:contributing
- no
- check:license
- no
- check:readme
- yes
- readme_lines
- 26
Type safetyskipped
Security
75 adequate
Security posture is adequate: no high-impact findings. Weakest area: posture.
How the score is built
- Secrets100
- Static analysis (SAST)81
- Vulnerable dependenciesnot measured
- CI workflowsnot measured
- Security posture0
- OpenSSF Scorecardnot measured
Evidence by analyzer
OpenSSF Scorecardskipped
no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo
Package registriesskipped
no registry dependencies declared
Secrets (gitleaks)ok
- secrets_current
- 0
- secrets_history
- 0
- secrets_low_confidence
- 0
- secrets_nonprod
- 0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
- findings
- 1
- findings_high
- 0
- findings_low
- 0
- findings_medium
- 1
- parse_errors
- 0
- scanned_lines
- 421
- weighted_findings
- 0.60
Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped
CI workflows (zizmor)skipped
Security postureok
- check:dependency_updates
- no
- check:lockfiles
- yes
- check:security_policy
- no
- check:signed_commits
- no
- signed_commit_share
- 0.0%
- unpinned_manifests
- 0
Release downloadsok
- binary_assets
- 0
- signals
- 0
- suspicious
- 0
Findings
1 medium
| Severity | Rule | Location | Message | Tool |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| medium | opengrep/java.android.security.exported_activity |
app/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml:10 | The application exports an activity. Any application on the device can launch the exported activity which may compromise the integrity of your application or its data. Ensure that any exported activities do not have privileged access... | Static analysis (opengrep) |
Tools and coverage
Every analyzer that ran on this commit. A failed or skipped tool is a coverage gap: its share of the score is left out and the coverage figure drops.
| Analyzer | Pillar | Status | Version | Findings | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI tool configuration | AI provenance | ok | signatures-v1 | 0 | |
| Explicit AI attribution | AI provenance | ok | signatures-v1 | 0 | |
| Release velocity | AI provenance | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Coding style | AI provenance | ok | — | 0 | |
| Commit velocity | AI provenance | ok | prov-4 | 0 | |
| Complexity (lizard) | Code quality | ok | lizard 1.25.1 | 0 | |
| Documentation | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Duplication (jscpd) | Code quality | ok | repotrust-dup-w6 | 0 | |
| Lint | Code quality | ok | opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414 | 0 | |
| Tests and CI | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Type safety | Code quality | skipped | — | 0 | |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | Security | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Dependencies (osv-scanner) | Security | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Release downloads | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Security posture | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Package registries | Security | skipped | — | 0 | no registry dependencies declared |
| Static analysis (opengrep) | Security | ok | opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414 | 1 | |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | Security | skipped | — | 0 | no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo |
| Secrets (gitleaks) | Security | ok | gitleaks 8.30.1 | 0 |
Score history
Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.
| Scored | Commit | Scoring | AI provenance | Quality | Security |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-11-14 | 3122cb6c5783 | prov-5+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 63 | 75 |
| 2026-11-14 | 3122cb6c5783 | prov-4+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 63 | 75 |
Full text report
- Repository: https://github.com/tyrantgit/ExplosionField
- Commit:
3122cb6c5783218f1a08787e6a6241e6e745695f - Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:08+00:00
- Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2
Scores
| Pillar | Score | Signal | Confidence | Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) | 0 | none-detected | 43% | 100% |
| Code quality | 63 | weak | 90% | 100% |
| Security | 75 | adequate | 85% | 100% |
AI provenance
No AI attribution or AI-consistent velocity signals detected.
- Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
- Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
- Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%
| Month | Lines added | Attributed to AI |
|---|---|---|
| 2015-09 | 452 | 0% |
AI provenance describes how code was produced; it is not a quality judgment. Unless attribution is explicit, these are signals consistent with AI generation, not proof. Squash/rebase workflows, imported code, and rewritten history reduce accuracy.
Code quality
Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.06, no CI test run detected; 0% of function code in complex or long functions; 12% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Complexity (lizard) | 100 |
| Duplication | 50 |
| Code smells (Opengrep) | 100 |
| Tests and CI | 29 |
| Documentation | 40 |
| Type safety | n/a |
| Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) | n/a |
- Functions: 27; mean complexity 1.9, 90th percentile 4; 0 complex and 0 long functions
- Duplicated lines: 11.6% of 259 compared
- Tests: 26 test lines for 421 source lines (ratio 0.06); CI test commands: none detected; 14% of recent source commits also change tests
- Docs missing or thin: license, contributing, changelog
Security
Security posture is adequate: no high-impact findings. Weakest area: posture.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) | 100 |
| Static analysis (Opengrep) | 81 |
| Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) | n/a |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | n/a |
| Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) | 0 |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | n/a |
- Posture checks passed: lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits
Top findings
| Severity | Finding | Location |
|---|---|---|
| medium | opengrep/java.android.security.exported_activity: The application exports an activity. Any application on the device can launch the exported activity which may compromise the integrity of your application or its data. Ensure that any exported activities do not have privileged access to your application's control plane. [confidence medium] |
app/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml:10 |
Static signals only: the scorer never runs the project's code. Secret findings are pattern matches that were not verified, and secret values are never stored.
Repository profile
- Source lines: 421; test lines: 26
| Language | Lines |
|---|---|
| Java | 447 |