Computed from git metadata only; no source code contents were read.
touch-weighted · 3-year history window · last commit 21d ago · scores are comparable only against same-mode scans
Modules ranked by comprehension risk: the unknown share, amplified by ongoing change and thin ownership. The green meter is living knowledge.
| Module | Risk | Living knowledge | AI-attr. | Inactive | Bus | Heat/180d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| src | LOW 20 | 77% | 0% | 17% | 1 | 24 |
| (root) | LOW 20 | 77% | 2% | 16% | 1 | 25 |
| docs | LOW 13 | 84% | 0% | 10% | 1 | 8 |
| tests | LOW 10 | 88% | 0% | 5% | 1 | 16 |
| .github | LOW 8 | 91% | 0% | 2% | 1 | 26 |
| examples | LOW 8 | 89% | 0% | 4% | 1 | 5 |
| requirements | LOW 7 | 90% | 0% | 2% | 1 | 0 |
One commit touched 90% of every file changed in this window. Wide, shallow commits, a formatter run or a license-header pass, add weight for their author across the whole surface while changing little. Worth looking at what that commit was before crediting the score to its author.
One commit accounts for 28% of the analysed lines. In a repository this size a single large change can move the score on its own, and git cannot tell a thoughtfully written thousand-line change from a thousand lines a formatter rewrote. Worth looking at what that commit actually was before reading much into the number; the touch-weighted view, which counts each file-touching commit once, is the cross-check.
Public-repo caveat: "departed" includes drive-by contributors, overstating attrition relative to a company repo with a real roster. Engagement is a proxy for comprehension. Treat it as a potential indicator rather than a diagnosis.