Repository Analysis

LuckyPennySoftware/MediatR

Simple, unambitious mediator implementation in .NET

3.3 Likely human-written View on GitHub

Analysis Overview

This report presents the forensic synthetic code analysis of LuckyPennySoftware/MediatR, a C# project with 11,849 GitHub stars. SynthScan v2.0 examined 12,056 lines of code across 161 source files, recording 40 pattern matches distributed across 2 syntactic categories. The overall adjusted score of 3.3 places this repository in the Likely human-written band.

The scanner applied 160+ deterministic lexical heuristics, multi-line block detectors, abstract syntax tree depth profilers, and a cross-file Jaccard similarity matrix to construct a statistically normalised synthetic code estimate. All matches are individually weighted by severity coefficient and contextual multiplier before summation, and the resulting headline score is temporally discounted to account for the repository's development history relative to the commercial emergence of large language model coding tooling (November 2022 onward).

3.3
Adjusted Score
3.3
Raw Score
100%
Time Factor
2026-07-02
Last Push
11.8K
Stars
C#
Language
12.1K
Lines of Code
161
Files
40
Pattern Hits
2026-07-14
Scan Date
0.00
HC Hit Rate

What These Metrics Mean

Adjusted Score
Primary synthetic code indicator. Raw score normalised per 1,000 lines of code and multiplied by the temporal discount factor. This is the definitive comparative metric — use it to rank repositories by AI authorship density.
Raw Score
The unmodified sum of all severity-weighted, context-multiplied pattern match scores before temporal discounting. Reflects the absolute signal strength independent of when the repository was last active.
Time Factor
The temporal discount multiplier (0–100%) applied to the raw score. Repositories last updated before ChatGPT's launch (Nov 2022) receive a 5% factor. Full signal is only assigned to repositories active in the post-adoption era (Jan 2024+).
Pattern Hits
Total count of individual pattern matches across all files and categories. A high hit count with a low score may indicate a very large codebase with isolated AI snippets; a low count with a high score indicates dense, concentrated AI signatures.
HC Hit Rate
High+Critical pattern hits per file, averaged across the repository. This orthogonal signal catches repositories where a few files are densely packed with high-severity AI tells — a strong indicator even when the normalised score appears moderate due to codebase size.
Lines of Code / Files
Total lines and files analysed. The scanner examines 94 file extensions. These denominators are used to normalise the score, enabling fair comparison between repositories of vastly different sizes.

Score History

This chart maps the temporal evolution of the adjusted synthetic code score across successive scan runs. An upward trajectory indicates ongoing incorporation of AI-generated code or expanding LLM-assisted scaffolding; a stable or declining trajectory may reflect active human refactoring, code removal, or the adoption of stricter authorship policies. The dashed secondary line (right axis) independently tracks total raw pattern hit count, which can diverge from the normalised score when codebase size changes significantly between scans.

Severity Breakdown

Classifies detected patterns by their diagnostic confidence and structural impact. CRITICAL patterns (coefficient 10) represent definitive synthetic signatures — hallucinated imports, explicit LLM attribution metadata — virtually never produced by human authors. HIGH (5) indicates strong structural tells such as cross-file repetition or cross-linguistic idioms. MEDIUM (2) covers recognisable conversational padding and AI-specific vocabulary. LOW (1) captures subtle indicators like tautological comments and generic boilerplate that require density to carry independent signal.

CRITICAL 0HIGH 0MEDIUM 0LOW 40

Directory Score Breakdown

This horizontal bar chart decomposes the repository's raw synthetic code score by top-level directory, allowing you to pinpoint precisely which modules or components carry the highest AI authorship density. Directories with disproportionately high scores relative to their size warrant targeted manual review: concentrated AI signatures often trace back to mass-generated configuration layers, auto-ported test suites, LLM-scaffolded boilerplate classes, or entire subsystems authored under heavy copilot assistance. Use this view to prioritise your human code-review effort.

Pattern Findings

The scanner identified 40 distinct pattern matches across 2 syntactic categories. Each entry below represents a discrete location in the source code where the engine recorded a statistically significant AI authorship indicator. Expand any category row to inspect the individual file paths, line numbers, code snippets, and the lexical context (CODE, COMMENT, or STRING) in which each match was detected.

Reading the findings table: The Severity column indicates the diagnostic confidence level (CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW). The Context column identifies whether the match occurred inside executable code, an inline comment, or a string literal — comment-context matches receive a ×1.5 weight because LLMs systematically over-annotate. The ⚡ bolt icon marks clustered matches: three or more patterns within a 10-line window, each receiving an additional ×1.5 density multiplier as dense clusters constitute far stronger evidence of synthetic authorship than isolated hits.

Over-Commented Block34 hits · 34 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWsamples/MediatR.Examples.Windsor/Program.cs41 container.Register(fromAssemblyContainingPing.BasedOn(typeof(IRequestExceptionHandler<,,>)).WithServiceAllInterfCOMMENT
LOWsamples/MediatR.Examples.Windsor/Program.cs61 // ?.IsAssignableTo(typeof(IRequestExceptionHandler<,,>)) ?? false;COMMENT
LOW…/MediatR.Examples.PublishStrategies/PublishStrategy.cs1namespace MediatR.Examples.PublishStrategies;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR.Contracts/IRequest.cs1namespace MediatR;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR.Contracts/Unit.cs21 public static Task<Unit> Task { get; } = System.Threading.Tasks.Task.FromResult(_value);COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR.Contracts/Unit.cs41 /// A value that indicates the relative order of the objects being compared.COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR.Contracts/Unit.cs61 /// <returns>COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR.Contracts/Unit.cs81 public static bool operator ==(Unit first, Unit second) => true;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IStreamPipelineBehavior.cs1COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IStreamPipelineBehavior.cs21{COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IPipelineBehavior.cs1COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IPipelineBehavior.cs21{COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IPublisher.cs1using System.Threading;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IPublisher.cs21 /// </summary>COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/ISender.cs21 /// <summary>COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/ISender.cs41 /// <typeparam name="TResponse"></typeparam>COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IRequestHandler.cs1using System.Threading;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IRequestHandler.cs21}COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/IStreamRequestHandler.cs1using System.Collections.Generic;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/Pipeline/IRequestPreProcessor.cs1namespace MediatR.Pipeline;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/Pipeline/IRequestPostProcessor.cs1namespace MediatR.Pipeline;COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/Pipeline/IRequestExceptionHandler.cs21 /// <param name="exception">The thrown exception</param>COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/Pipeline/RequestExceptionHandlerState.cs1namespace MediatR.Pipeline;COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs21 /// Mediator implementation type to register. Default is <see cref="Mediator"/>COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs41 /// Request exception action processor strategy. Default value is <see cref="DependencyInjection.RequestExceptionActCOMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs61 public List<ServiceDescriptor> RequestPreProcessorsToRegister { get; } = new();COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs81 public int MaxTypesClosing { get; set; } = 100;COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs101 public string? LicenseKey { get; set; }COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs141 return this;COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs261 COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs281 StreamBehaviorsToRegister.Add(new ServiceDescriptor(serviceType, implementationType, serviceLifetime));COMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs341 StreamBehaviorsToRegister.Add(new ServiceDescriptor(openBehaviorInterface, openBehaviorType, serviceLifetimeCOMMENT
LOW…R/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/MediatrServiceConfiguration.cs441 => AddRequestPostProcessor(typeof(TServiceType), typeof(TImplementationType), serviceLifetime);COMMENT
LOWsrc/MediatR/Entities/OpenBehavior.cs21 OpenBehaviorType = openBehaviorType;COMMENT
Hyper-Verbose Identifiers6 hits · 6 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWtest/MediatR.Tests/SendTests.cs120 public class TestClass1PingRequestHandler : IRequestHandler<VoidGenericPing<PongExtension>>CODE
LOWtest/MediatR.Tests/SendTests.cs149 public class MultipleGenericTypeParameterRequestHandler<T1, T2, T3> : IRequestHandler<MultipleGenericTypeParameterReCODE
LOWtest/MediatR.Tests/SendTests.cs185 public class TimeoutRequestHandler : IRequestHandler<TimeoutRequest>CODE
LOWtest/MediatR.Tests/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/Handlers.cs222 class OpenGenericVoidRequestHandler<T> : IRequestHandler<OpenGenericVoidRequest<T>>CODE
LOWtest/MediatR.Tests/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/Handlers.cs230 class OpenGenericReturnTypeRequestHandler<T> : IRequestHandler<OpenGenericReturnTypeRequest<T>, string>CODE
LOW…t/MediatR.Tests/MicrosoftExtensionsDI/PipelineTests.cs902 public sealed class FooRequestHandler : IRequestHandler<FooRequest> {CODE