5.3%

of 150 commits were committed by an AI agent — a floor, not an estimate

5.3% agent · top contributor 87.5%2 contributors

individual

One person is driving this. The headline number reflects a single contributor's workflow, not a project-wide shift.

agent commits

142

human commits

agent contributors

87.5%

largest contributor

Assisted or autonomous

1assisted

7autonomous

Assisted — a developer’s identity authored the commit and the agent added itself as co-author. The agent ran git commit during a working session, with a person there. Autonomous — a bot identity is the author, no human in the loop. Across the whole index, 93.7% of agent commits are assisted.

Agent share by month

Feb26

Apr26

Jun26

Jul26

Aug26

Sep26

Peak month: 50%. Bars are scaled to that peak, not to 100%.

Which agents

GitHub Copilot

GitHub

5.3%

Verify it yourself

Sample commits that matched. Every one links to GitHub — check the trailers.

0d599d96Make IndexMapBiDi index handling bounds-safeGitHub Copilot
91340efdRefine fix: move env override to file scope to avoid recursive block-scopeGitHub Copilot
ef499708Fix recursive static initialization in SIMDDetect::GetDetector()GitHub Copilot

What was excluded

Commits in window	161
Merge commits removed	−7
CI / dependency bots removed	−4
Considered	150

Bots are excluded from the denominator entirely. Counting dependabot as “AI-written code” is the fastest way to produce a meaningless number.

How this was measured

Measured over February–August 2026, cloned directly. Detection is deterministic string matching against signatures agents write about themselves — no heuristics, no style analysis. Merge commits and CI bots are excluded from the denominator. The figure is a floor: squash merges strip trailers, so real usage is higher. Contributor counts are aggregate — no individual is named.

Run it yourself: npx qmmit-cli tesseract-ocr/tesseract

Scan another repository

Try