survival report #1 · 2026-09-20 · method v2 · causari 0.1.5 · unranked

Survival Report #1

462,838 of 754,476 lines introduced by 12,349 AI-tagged commits in 10 open-source repositories are still at HEAD (61.3 %). 95 % interval over the sampled repositories: 53.0 % to 64.9 %. These are counts, not grades. There is no rank, no colour and no verdict on this page; rows are alphabetical. Every number links to the audit bytes behind it and the method and its limits are public.

DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22863966 · report.json · report.md · card · Atom feed · all reports

10repositories aggregated 12,349AI-tagged commits · of 86,024 754,476lines introduced by them 462,838still attributed to them at HEAD 61.3 %line-weighted · 95 % interval 53.0 % – 64.9 % 65.7 %median of capped per-repository ratios · 38.6 % – 80.0 %

Repositories

Alphabetical. VERIFIED commits only; PROBABLE counts are shown but never summed. Capped: no commit weighs more than the cap. Median per commit: the middle commit's own ratio. Largest commit: share of introduced lines from the single largest commit. Every number links to the audit bytes of this run; re audit <owner/repo> --json reproduces a row. Each repository name links to its own page: history across reports and a badge.

Repository	Commits	AI-tagged	Lines introduced	Still at HEAD	Line-weighted	Capped	Median per commit	Largest commit
Aider-AI/aider	12,461	11,156	374,687	235,782	62.9 %	41.9 %	33.3 %	27 %
anthropics/anthropic-sdk-python	1,390	38	4,852	4,043	83.3 %	80.0 %	83.7 %	33 %
anthropics/anthropic-sdk-typescript	1,321	48	13,796	11,394	82.6 %	84.7 %	96.1 %	40 %
browser-use/browser-use	7,000	220	18,186	3,184	17.5 %	23.4 %	0.0 %	21 %
cline/cline	7,273	154	95,301	63,063	66.2 %	67.9 %	72.0 %	12 %
continuedev/continue	16,266	228 (+3 probable)	27,756	18,063	65.1 %	63.5 %	68.1 %	11 %
croviatrust/causari	127	14	6,267	5,595	89.3 %	89.3 %	96.2 %	25 %
ghostty-org/ghostty	13,460	77	3,725	2,570	69.0 %	73.4 %	86.0 %	13 %
openai/codex	11,046	364	183,908	109,674	59.6 %	59.1 %	58.8 %	6 %
sst/opencode	15,680	50	25,998	9,470	36.4 %	35.4 %	39.5 %	43 %

By agent, across the aggregated repositories

Alphabetical. A commit is attributed to the agent its metadata names; one agent per commit.

Agent	Repositories	Commits	Lines introduced	Still at HEAD	Line-weighted
ai	1	1	28	20	71.4 %
aider	2	11,157	374,809	235,802	62.9 %
claude-code	9	602	117,299	77,229	65.8 %
cursor	6	165	24,979	18,204	72.9 %
gemini	1	1	4	3	75.0 %
github-copilot	6	67	55,707	23,094	41.5 %
jules	1	1	4	0	0.0 %
openai-codex	3	354	181,501	108,353	59.7 %
openhands	1	1	145	133	91.7 %

Excluded from this report

Shallow clones (history truncated; method v2 refuses them): none.
Audits that failed in this run: none.
Opted out by their maintainers: 0. One line in .github/survival-optout.txt removes a repository from the next report, no questions asked.

Method

Method v2, causari 0.1.5. Detection from commit metadata only; no model, no guess from the diff. Full text and known artefacts at causari.dev/method.
Survival: git blame -w -M -C at HEAD, honouring .git-blame-ignore-revs where present; a line counts for the commit blame attributes it to, capped at that commit's introduced count.
Cap rule: a commit weighs at most the 95th percentile of per-commit introduced line counts in its repository, and never more than 10,000 lines. The capped ratio is what one bulk commit cannot dominate.
Sample floor: 5 VERIFIED commits. Below it a repository is measured but not aggregated.
Intervals: 95 % percentile interval from 2000 bootstrap resamples of the 10 aggregated repositories (with replacement, seed 1). It describes the sampled repositories, not all AI-assisted code, and not the repositories not in this sample.
Full clones only: method v2 refuses shallow clones; the workflow clones each repository completely before measuring.
Reproduce or contest: re audit <owner/repo> --json gives the exact bytes behind a row; the bytes of this run are under repos/ next to this page. Open an issue with your JSON if it differs.

Cite as: Crovia Trust. Survival Report #1 (2026-09-20). https://causari.dev/reports/survival/2026/01/ DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22863966

What this report is, and is not

This report counts lines. For each repository it states how many lines were introduced by commits that carry machine-readable AI authorship metadata (trailers such as Co-Authored-By naming an agent, bot author identities, aider markers, git-ai notes), and how many of those lines git blame still attributes to those commits at HEAD, under method v2 (blame with -w -M -C, a per-commit weight cap, a sample floor, full clones only). Every row is reproducible with one command.

It is not a quality judgement: deleted lines include removed features and rewritten prototypes; surviving lines include dead code. It is not a sample of all AI-assisted code: inline completions leave no trace in git, untagged agent commits are invisible, and the repositories were added by pull request, not drawn at random. The intervals describe the sampled repositories only.

Prior measurement work asks related questions with different instruments. GitClear publishes churn reports built from code-change patterns across the repositories it analyses; arXiv 2601.16809 ("Will It Survive?") follows the modification of agent-authored code in 201 projects with its own detector and finds that such code is modified less often than human-written code. This report does not reproduce either method and does not adjudicate between them: it publishes counts from git metadata alone, with the method version, the tool version and the exact bytes behind every number, so that the three can be read side by side.

re audit <owner/repo> --json   # the exact bytes behind any row