Repository Analysis

alpinejs/alpine

A rugged, minimal framework for composing JavaScript behavior in your markup.

1.5 Likely human-written View on GitHub

Analysis Overview

This report presents the forensic synthetic code analysis of alpinejs/alpine, a HTML project with 31,887 GitHub stars. SynthScan v2.0 examined 70,947 lines of code across 300 source files, recording 58 pattern matches distributed across 5 syntactic categories. The overall adjusted score of 1.5 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).

1.5
Adjusted Score
1.5
Raw Score
100%
Time Factor
2026-08-25
Last Push
31.9K
Stars
HTML
Language
70.9K
Lines of Code
300
Files
58
Pattern Hits
2026-08-29
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 12LOW 46

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 58 distinct pattern matches across 5 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.

Decorative Section Separators12 hits · 46 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
MEDIUMscripts/setup.sh4# ── Install deps ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/worktree.sh4# ── Resolve the repo root from this script's location ────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/worktree.sh7# ── Usage ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/worktree.sh26# ── Check if it already exists ───────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/worktree.sh34# ── Fetch & create ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/worktree.sh41# ── Install deps ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/worktree.sh47# ── Done ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/cleanup-worktree.sh4# ── Resolve the repo root from this script's location ────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/cleanup-worktree.sh7# ── Usage ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/cleanup-worktree.sh23# ── Validate ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/cleanup-worktree.sh29# ── Remove ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
MEDIUMscripts/cleanup-worktree.sh33# ── Prune any stale worktree references ──────────────────────────────────────COMMENT
Structural Annotation Overuse16 hits · 29 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOW.claude/skills/summarize-activity/SKILL.md15## Step 1: Parse timeframeCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/summarize-activity/SKILL.md33## Step 2: Fetch activity in parallelCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/summarize-activity/SKILL.md88## Step 3: Fetch comment threads for active itemsCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/summarize-activity/SKILL.md118## Step 4: Filter by timeframeCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/summarize-activity/SKILL.md125## Step 5: Analyze and write reportCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md15## Step 1: Pick a PRCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md23## Step 2: Check if already reviewedCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md33## Step 3: Fetch PR dataCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md44## Step 4: Checkout locally and merge mainCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md53## Step 5: Read and classifyCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md63## Step 6: Challenge the contributor's framingCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md72## Step 7: EvaluateCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md112## Step 8: Run relevant tests onlyCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md148## Step 9: Make fixes directlyCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md168## Step 10: Push to PR branchCOMMENT
LOW.claude/skills/review-pr/SKILL.md201## Step 11: Post verdict commentCOMMENT
Hyper-Verbose Identifiers18 hits · 18 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWtests/cypress/integration/error-handling.spec.js18export function assertConsoleInterceptorHadErrorWithCorrectElement() {CODE
LOWpackages/sort/src/index.js65function getConfigurationOverrides(el, modifiers, evaluate)CODE
LOWpackages/sort/src/index.js162function keepElementsWithinMorphMarkers(el) {CODE
LOWpackages/morph/src/morph.js545function monkeyPatchDomSetAttributeToAllowAtSymbols() {CODE
LOWpackages/morph/src/old_morph.js85 function differentElementNamesTypesOrKeys(from, to) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/mutation.js106export function flushAndStopDeferringMutations() {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/clone.js75function dontRegisterReactiveSideEffects(callback) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/evaluator.js7export function dontAutoEvaluateFunctions(callback) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/evaluator.js57export function generateEvaluatorFromFunction(dataStack, func) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/evaluator.js74function generateFunctionFromString(expression, el) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/evaluator.js116function generateEvaluatorFromString(dataStack, expression, el) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/directives/x-data.js120function shouldSkipRegisteringDataDuringClone(el) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/directives/index.js29function warnMissingPluginDirective(name, directiveName, slug) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/directives/x-transition.js18function registerTransitionsFromClassString(el, classString, stage) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/directives/x-transition.js33function registerTransitionsFromHelper(el, modifiers, stage) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/directives/x-for.js170function getIterationScopeVariables(iteratorNames, item, index, items) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/utils/on.js134function isListeningForASpecificKeyThatHasntBeenPressed(e, modifiers) {CODE
LOWpackages/alpinejs/src/utils/bind.js183function attributeShouldntBePreservedIfFalsy(name) {CODE
Fake / Example Data7 hits · 7 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWtests/cypress/integration/plugins/ui/combobox.spec.js408 <article>lorem ipsum</article>CODE
LOWtests/cypress/integration/plugins/ui/combobox.spec.js499 <article>lorem ipsum</article>CODE
LOWtests/cypress/integration/plugins/ui/combobox.spec.js1278 <article>lorem ipsum</article>CODE
LOWtests/cypress/integration/plugins/ui/combobox.spec.js1408 <article>lorem ipsum</article>CODE
LOWpackages/docs/src/en/plugins/collapse.md75 Reprehenderit eu excepteur ullamco esse cillum reprehenderit exercitation labore non. Dolore dolore ea dolorCODE
LOWpackages/docs/src/en/plugins/collapse.md105 Reprehenderit eu excepteur ullamco esse cillum reprehenderit exercitation labore non. Dolore dolore ea dolorCODE
LOWpackages/docs/src/en/plugins/collapse.md134 Reprehenderit eu excepteur ullamco esse cillum reprehenderit exercitation labore non. Dolore dolore ea dolorCODE
Over-Commented Block5 hits · 5 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWtests/cypress/plugins/index.js1/// <reference types="cypress" />COMMENT
LOWtests/cypress/integration/plugins/ui/dialog.spec.js201// Skipping these two tests as anything focus related seems to be flakyCOMMENT
LOWtests/cypress/support/index.js1// ***********************************************************COMMENT
LOWtests/cypress/support/commands.js1// ***********************************************COMMENT
LOWtests/cypress/support/commands.js21// Cypress.Commands.add("dismiss", { prevSubject: 'optional'}, (subject, options) => { ... })COMMENT