← the index
williamfiset/algorithms
81.4%
of 102 commits were committed by an AI agent — a floor, not an estimate
81.4% agent · top contributor 100%1 contributor
individual

One person is driving this. The headline number reflects a single contributor's workflow, not a project-wide shift.

83
agent commits
19
human commits
1
agent contributors
100%
largest contributor

Assisted or autonomous

83assisted
0autonomous

Assisted — a developer’s identity authored the commit and the agent added itself as co-author. The agent ran git commit during a working session, with a person there. Autonomous — a bot identity is the author, no human in the loop. Across the whole index, 93.7% of agent commits are assisted.

Agent share by month

Mar26
Apr26
Jun26

Peak month: 82.8%. Bars are scaled to that peak, not to 100%.

Which agents

Claude CodeAnthropic8381.4%

Verify it yourself

Sample commits that matched. Every one links to GitHub — check the trailers.

  • 4371d09fRefactor HashTableOpenAddressingBase: consolidate API and enhance docs (#1Claude Code
  • a236008cRefactor HashTableSeparateChaining: encapsulate Entry, fix iterator, simplClaude Code
  • 69b49f74Add Tim sort implementation with testsClaude Code

What was excluded

Commits in window103
Merge commits removed1
CI / dependency bots removed0
Considered102

Bots are excluded from the denominator entirely. Counting dependabot as “AI-written code” is the fastest way to produce a meaningless number.

How this was measured

Measured over February–August 2026, cloned directly. Detection is deterministic string matching against signatures agents write about themselves — no heuristics, no style analysis. Merge commits and CI bots are excluded from the denominator. The figure is a floor: squash merges strip trailers, so real usage is higher. Contributor counts are aggregate — no individual is named.

Run it yourself: npx qmmit-cli williamfiset/algorithms

Scan another repository