Review economics
keras-team/keras
Read from the 100 most recently merged pull requests ·
Not enough merged pull requests on both sides yet to compare how they land in review.
≥2%
Attributed
a floor
1
Attributed PRs
99
Other PRs
100
Read
Attributed — the latest 1
The rest — the latest 5
#23329 Raise ValueError for out-of-bounds axis in LayerNormalization.build()
1 round · 3 reviews · 9.2d to merge
#23389 Fix MultiProcessInitializeTest causing TorchInductor compilation failures
2 reviews · 22h to merge
#23368 [Bug] Fail fast on invalid callbacks in CallbackList
2 rounds · 4 reviews · 4.0d to merge
#23388 Optimize array unstacking in Numpy and JAX backends
2 reviews · 7h to merge
#22971 Adding an Adapt progress bar
1 round · 4 reviews · 73.1d to merge
How this was measured
2% of merged commits carry agent attribution — a floor, not the share; tools that only complete code inline leave no commit trail, so the unattributed side includes AI-assisted work; reads 100 of 5181 merged PRs — the rest have not been analyzed yet.
Detected: Gemini CLI.
“Attributed” means a commit carried an agent’s signature — a co-author trailer, an agent commit identity, or an agent bot account. Tools that only complete code inline leave no such mark, so the other column is “rest”, not “human-written”. Full method and its limits
The badge reads this repo’s current report, so it follows the number.
Tell me when this moves
We re-read keras-team/keras weekly and email only when the number changes materially.
Read your own repos
This one is public. For a private repo, run the same read locally through your own GitHub credentials — nothing is installed and nothing is sent to us.
npx @ambera/review-taxWant this continuously on keras-team/keras — each pull request paired to the task it came from, and the work graded from its review loop rather than its diff size? Claim this repo in Forge
Browse every repo people have read · Read a different repository