Repository Analysis

stonerl/Thaw

Menu bar manager for macOS 26

3.5 Likely human-written View on GitHub

Analysis Overview

This report presents the forensic synthetic code analysis of stonerl/Thaw, a Swift project with 8,614 GitHub stars. SynthScan v2.0 examined 64,966 lines of code across 256 source files, recording 227 pattern matches distributed across 3 syntactic categories. The overall adjusted score of 3.5 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).

3.5
Adjusted Score
3.5
Raw Score
100%
Time Factor
2026-07-14
Last Push
8.6K
Stars
Swift
Language
65.0K
Lines of Code
256
Files
227
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 8LOW 219

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 227 distinct pattern matches across 3 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 Block217 hits · 205 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWThawTests/ProfileLayoutLogReplayTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/ProfileLayoutLogReplayTests.swift21/// excerpt and another expectation.COMMENT
LOWThawTests/ProfileLayoutLogReplayTests.swift521COMMENT
LOWThawTests/SavedPositionLookupTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PendingRehideTagIdentifiersTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PlanLCSMoveSequenceTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PlanPendingMoveTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/MenuBarItemManagerRearmTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PlanLeftmostMoveTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/SelectWindowForBatchScanTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/ShouldPersistSavedOrderTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PlanSectionOrderTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/ControlCenterHostedMatchLogReplayTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/ControlCenterHostedMatchLogReplayTests.swift21/// - Little Snitch publishes NO extras-bar child of its own, so the only AXCOMMENT
LOW…wTests/ProfileManagerUpdateRearmIntegrationTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/DisplaySpreadGateTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/DisplaySpreadGateTests.swift21/// resolves each item's move against whichever display its window currentlyCOMMENT
LOWThawTests/PlanFullSortSequenceTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/MarkerPairResolverTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/ProfileManagerRearmGateTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PlanUnmanagedPlacementTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/AnchorDestinationTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/LayoutReconcilerTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PlanNotchOverflowTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/ProfileApplyInFlightFlagTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/WindowIDsChangedGateTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/OnboardingSlideTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/FlattenCurrentSectionsTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PartitionUnmanagedUIDsTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThawTests/PartitionUnmanagedUIDsTests.swift21/// from savedSectionOrder by design, so they would never appear inCOMMENT
LOWThawTests/MenuBarTestFixturesTests.swift1//COMMENT
LOW…wTests/Fixtures/ControlCenterHostedResolutionLog.swift1//COMMENT
LOW…wTests/Fixtures/ControlCenterHostedResolutionLog.swift21 /// Little Snitch agent icon, from thaw_2026-06-08_20-54-21.log (beta.15,COMMENT
LOWThawTests/Fixtures/LittleSnitchOrphanLog.swift1//COMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/SharedConstants.swift1//COMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/WindowInfo.swift1//COMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/MarkerPairResolver.swift1//COMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/MarkerPairResolver.swift21/// falls back to com.apple.controlcenter, colliding with Apple's realCOMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/MarkerPairResolver.swift61 }COMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/MarkerPairResolver.swift181 /// CC widget (isTransientControlCenterItem true, canBeHidden false), hidingCOMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/MarkerPairResolver.swift201/// pass (AirBuddy's icon sits ~2pt off, SpamSieve up to ~8pt).COMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/MarkerPairResolver.swift221 /// Comparison is case-insensitive. Generic titles without a reverse-DNSCOMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/DiagnosticLogger.swift1//COMMENT
LOWShared/Utilities/DiagnosticLogger.swift161 let dir = fileURL.deletingLastPathComponent()COMMENT
LOWShared/Bridging/Bridging.swift81 // MARK: Private Display HelpersCOMMENT
LOWShared/Bridging/Bridging.swift301COMMENT
LOWShared/Bridging/Bridging.swift541 return array as NSArray?COMMENT
LOW.github/workflows/issue-triage.lock.yml1# gh-aw-metadata: {"schema_version":"v4","frontmatter_hash":"e6dfe4132976d6a78f38f87845cbdbfce96f9bb127f693cc45c53acc8f1COMMENT
LOW.github/workflows/issue-triage.lock.yml21# Not all edits will cause changes to this file.COMMENT
LOWMenuBarItemService/SourcePIDCache.swift1//COMMENT
LOWMenuBarItemService/SourcePIDCache.swift281 /// performing a single batch resolution if any are missing.COMMENT
LOWMenuBarItemService/SourcePIDCache.swift381COMMENT
LOWMenuBarItemService/SourcePIDCache.swift461 // Marker-pair PID resolution.COMMENT
LOWMenuBarItemService/SourcePIDCache.swift481 //COMMENT
LOWMenuBarItemService/SourcePIDCache.swift541 // Diagnostic dump for unresolved windows.COMMENT
LOWMenuBarItemService/main.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThaw/Thaw-Bridging-Header.h1//COMMENT
LOWThaw/UI/Utilities/IceGradient.swift1//COMMENT
LOWThaw/UI/Utilities/IceGradient.swift101 /// the returned color. Converting the color to a different color spaceCOMMENT
LOWThaw/UI/IceUI/IceMenu.swift1//COMMENT
157 more matches not shown…
Modern AI Meta-Vocabulary8 hits · 21 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md40- Configuration: https://github.com/github/gh-aw/blob/v0.76.1/.github/aw/github-agentic-workflows.mdCODE
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md62**Prompt file**: https://github.com/github/gh-aw/blob/v0.76.1/.github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.mdCODE
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md72**Prompt file**: https://github.com/github/gh-aw/blob/v0.76.1/.github/aw/update-agentic-workflow.mdCODE
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md82**Prompt file**: https://github.com/github/gh-aw/blob/v0.76.1/.github/aw/debug-agentic-workflow.mdCODE
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md92**Prompt file**: https://github.com/github/gh-aw/blob/v0.76.1/.github/aw/upgrade-agentic-workflows.mdCODE
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md112**Prompt file**: https://github.com/github/gh-aw/blob/v0.76.1/.github/aw/create-shared-agentic-workflow.mdCODE
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md196# Initialize repository for agentic workflowsCOMMENT
MEDIUM.github/agents/agentic-workflows.agent.md228- Always reference the instructions file at https://github.com/github/gh-aw/blob/v0.76.1/.github/aw/github-agentic-workfCODE
Fake / Example Data2 hits · 3 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWdocs/URI_SCHEMES.md73# @raycast.argument1 { "type": "dropdown", "placeholder": "Action", "data": [{"title": "Toggle Hidden", "value": "toggleCOMMENT
LOWdocs/URI_SCHEMES.md489# @raycast.argument1 { "type": "dropdown", "placeholder": "Setting", "data": [{"title": "Auto-Rehide", "value": "autoRehCOMMENT