Public report of OpenBMB/MiniCPM-V, published 20 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive report Measured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey → Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 20 October 2026, 18:12 UTC · Survey ID cd_8b73355a5bf440cc86103386b06151ae

OpenBMB/MiniCPM-V

Measured 20 October 2026, 18:09 UTC, at code version dfe5db0

Test distribution is not measured: No automated tests.

Knowledge freshness is not measured: Freshness signal contradicted by repo activity.

CAI score 28out of 100 At risk Down 2 since the last survey

The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.

A medium codebase: 26,028 lines of product code in 4 projects, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.2 person-years · Weakest lens: Production Readiness, 16

Findings by how serious they are

114 critical 506 serious 130 minor

15 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.

This survey was produced by

Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
20 October 2026, 18:09 UTC

A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.

A critical security finding is open, such as a library with a known critical vulnerability or a password or key found in the code. The score itself is unchanged, but its band shows At risk until the finding is fixed. See the Security and Compliance lens.

The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸

68of 72 dimensions measured by tools. The other 4 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
662of 750 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 88 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
72dimensions across 7 lenses, read from 26,028 lines of product code in 4 projects.
Chapters

Executive summary

OpenBMB/MiniCPM-V scores 28 out of 100, but it is rated At risk while a critical security finding is open; the score itself is unchanged.

The weakest lens counts most in the score, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 16 and is rated Critical. Its Code Coverage dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage and to resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 28 to about 38.

114 findings are critical: 57 in Static Analysis (SAST), 40 in Dependency Vulnerabilities, seven in Text alternatives, five in Keyboard semantics, two in Page structure, one in Code Coverage, one in IaC & Container Security and one in License Compliance.

Watchdog couldn't measure 14 dimensions in this code, among them Internal API Consistency, Navigability and Data Protection, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 26,028 lines, which would take an estimated 0.2 person-years, around €22,000, to rebuild.

A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Production Readiness 16 · counts for 46%Code Health 29 · counts for 25%Accessibility 30 · counts for 14%Maturity 37 · counts for 8%Security and Compliance 72 · counts for 4%Architecture 94 · counts for 2%Performance 100 · counts for 1%

If Production Readiness rose from 16 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 28 to about 38.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Product code 100%
New since the last survey: 13 findings

These 13 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 4 October 2026.

  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · REDACTED
  • Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue: 950 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue
  • Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue: 945 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue
  • Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue: 813 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue
  • Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue: 810 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue
  • Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue: 450 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue
  • Visual & motion safety · Focus outline removed in CSS without a :focus replacement web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/styles/main.css
  • Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/Voice/index.vue

Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.

Fixed since the last survey: 13 findings

These 13 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 4 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: [GHSA redacted] REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE: REDACTED REDACTED
  • Large Files · Large Files
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) REDACTED
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) REDACTED
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/kie_evaluator.py
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/smp/vlm.py
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED
  • Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED
Rebuild cost: about €22,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€7,400 to €37,000, for 123 to 389 hours of work, about 0.2 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problemStandard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write.
Quality factor×0.7 at a score of 28. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
SizeMedium: 26,028 lines of product code

How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.

Top priorities

The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.

1
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage.
Raises the score by about 9 points · Low effort · Code Coverage
2
Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution.
Raises the score by about 9 points · Low effort · Test Distribution
3
Resolve the 1 Banned license finding(s) in License Compliance.
Raises the score by about 5 points · Low effort · License Compliance

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €22,000 to build again, about 0.2 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 16 (Critical). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Production Readiness grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Production Readiness actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 9 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Code Coverage findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
What hard-to-read code costs each year · Cost
Four dimensions measure how easy the code is to work in: two measure how tangled its logic is, one how much of it is copied, and one how well each part sticks to a single job. In this codebase they average 5.8 out of 10. Code at that level is slower to change than clean code, and Watchdog estimates the extra work at 5% to 12% on every change. The history of the code shows how much it changes: about 12,949 lines over the last 90 days, which is about 52,515 lines a year. At that pace, the extra work comes to an estimated 7.1 to 42.8 engineer-days a year, and it grows as more code changes.
How this is estimated: The number of changed lines is measured from the history of the code. The rest rests on two assumptions of Watchdog's own: code scoring 8 out of 10 or more adds no extra work, and each point below 8 adds 2.5% to 5.6% to every change; and an engineer changes 150 to 400 lines in a day. The result is a range for planning, not a measurement.
Based on: Cyclomatic Complexity · Cognitive Complexity · Code Duplication · Cohesion (LCOM4) · the code's change history
What to do: Start with the files listed under Churn × Complexity Hotspots, which change often and are hard to read, because that is where the extra work is paid most often.

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.

83 modules, with 34 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 43 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →1 (global)2 chat3 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.base4 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_base5 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_base6 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.common7 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_base8 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.base9 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.gpt10 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset11 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cgbench12 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cmmmu13 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dude14 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dynamath15 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_caption16 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_ccocr17 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mcq18 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mt19 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_vqa20 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_yorn21 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.longvideobench22 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.miabench23 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmbench_video24 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmgenbench25 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmlongbench26 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmmath27 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mvbench28 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.slidevqa29 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_mcq30 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.doc_parsing_evaluator31 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.kie_evaluator32 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.ocr_evaluator33 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vcr34 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_concat_dataset35 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.videomme36 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vl_rewardbench37 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.wildvision38 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.minicpm_v39 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mlvu40 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.tempcompass
1 (global)
2 chat
3 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.base
4 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_base
5 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_base
6 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.common
7 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_base
8 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.base
9 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.gpt1
10 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset1
11 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cgbench4
12 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cmmmu1
13 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dude1
14 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dynamath1
15 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_caption1
16 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_ccocr1
17 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mcq1
18 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mt1
19 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_vqa17
20 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_yorn1
21 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.longvideobench1
22 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.miabench1
23 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmbench_video1
24 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmgenbench1
25 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmlongbench1
26 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmmath1
27 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mvbench2
28 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.slidevqa1
29 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_mcq1
30 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.doc_parsing_evaluator1
31 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.kie_evaluator1
32 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.ocr_evaluator1
33 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vcr1
34 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_concat_dataset1
35 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.videomme1
36 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vl_rewardbench1
37 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.wildvision1
38 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.minicpm_v4
39 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mlvu21
40 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.tempcompass31
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 (global)2 chat3 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.base4 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_base5 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_base6 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.common7 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_base8 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.base9 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.gpt10 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset11 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cgbench12 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cmmmu13 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dude14 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dynamath15 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_caption16 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_ccocr17 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mcq18 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mt19 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_vqa20 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_yorn21 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.longvideobench22 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.miabench23 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmbench_video24 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmgenbench25 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmlongbench26 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmmath27 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mvbench28 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.slidevqa29 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_mcq30 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.doc_parsing_evaluator31 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.kie_evaluator32 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.ocr_evaluator33 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vcr34 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_concat_dataset35 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.videomme36 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vl_rewardbench37 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.wildvision38 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.minicpm_v39 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mlvu40 eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.tempcompass(global)1chat2eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.base3eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_base4eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_base5eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.common6eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_base7eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.base8eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.api.gpt9eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset10eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cgbench11eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.cmmmu12eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dude13eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.dynamath14eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_caption15eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_ccocr16eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mcq17eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_mt18eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_vqa19eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.image_yorn20eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.longvideobench21eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.miabench22eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmbench_video23eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmgenbench24eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmlongbench25eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mmmath26eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mvbench27eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.slidevqa28eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.text_mcq29eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.doc_parsing_evaluator30eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.kie_evaluator31eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.utils.ccocr_evaluator.ocr_evaluator32eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vcr33eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.video_concat_dataset34eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.videomme35eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.vl_rewardbench36eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.wildvision37eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.vlm.minicpm_v38eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.mlvu39eval_mm.vlmevalkit.vlmeval.dataset.tempcompass4011411111111711111112111111111142131+43 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 29% · Weak · gated by D2, R1, R7, X3, X4 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 94% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 37% · Weak · gated by M2, M4 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 16% · Critical · gated by D8, D9, R4, R6, P1, P3 ·

At a glance — Security · 72% · Adequate · gated by D29, D30 ·

At a glance — Accessibility · 30% · Weak · gated by AC1, AC3, AC4 ·

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

Findings mapped to OWASP categories; the specific CVEs/secrets are in the Security dimension cards below and findings.md (redacted only on the public version of this report).

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A05:2025 — Injection67High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures56High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration5High / Critical

Roadmap

First, address the single gaps in code coverage and test distribution by resolving the identified findings to ensure existing tests are properly recognized and executed. Next, remediate the banned license issue to ensure full compliance. Finally, establish a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push, integrating security tooling to fail the build on regressions.

Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage.+9.5 ptsLowCode Coverage
Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution.+9.5 ptsLowTest Distribution
Resolve the 1 Banned license finding(s) in License Compliance.+4.6 ptsLowLicense Compliance
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.+2.5 ptsLowADR Quality
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.+2.9 ptsMediumCI/CD gates
Run what this repository's stack ships: bandit, `semgrep --config=p/python`, or CodeQL's python pack — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.+2.9 ptsMediumSecurity & performance tooling
Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).+2.9 ptsMediumTest Coverage
Reconcile the README with reality: docs/deployment_en.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; docs/deployment_zh.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; eval_mm/README.md runs `./scripts/run_inference.sh $MODELNAME $DATALIST`, but `scripts/run_inference.sh` does not exist; eval_mm/README.md names `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py`, but no file or folder `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py` exists; eval_mm/README.md runs `./shell/run_inference.sh`, but `shell/run_inference.sh` does not exist.+1.7 ptsMediumDocumentation accuracy

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 81 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 17% slop · 68% mixed · 15% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED0.0SlopDependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED0.6SlopDependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED1.3SlopDependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED1.4SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED1.5SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED1.7SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED1.8SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED2.0SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED2.1SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED2.5SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED2.8SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED2.8SlopIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
REDACTED3.0SlopDependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED3.6SlopStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.0MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED4.2MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.2MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.3MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.3MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED4.8MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED

How the grades work

Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.

Critical — 114

A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here tends to cause failures elsewhere.

Serious — 506

Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to carry for two years either.

Minor — 130

Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions. Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.

Could not be resolved — 15

Something this survey could not settle from the outside, and which could be critical or serious. Either a control was required and no positive evidence of it exists in the repository — a backup job that nothing shows was ever restored from proves nothing about restores — or our own analysis could not run over that part of the tree. This is not a clean result. These are excluded from the score rather than awarded a pass, so the number on the cover neither rewards nor penalises them: if you act on this survey without resolving them, you carry that risk yourself. Each one is named under Limitations.

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 68 of 72 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.

What we checked — 72 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D4D6D8D9D12D13D14D15D16D17D19D20D21D26D28D29D30D31D35D43D44AC1AC2AC3AC4AC6AC7AX10AX3AX4M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P6PF3R1R10R2R3R4R6R7R8R9S1X1X12X13X14X15X17X19X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X3X30X4

Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.

How to trust any code-health report — three questions
  1. Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 662 of 750 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
  2. Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
  3. Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.

Tools & methods

The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)Code duplication1.0.0✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.400✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.400✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementLocal LLM◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a15a81-2c2a-70cd-b8e3-fdebb433977a.

The exact command behind every deep-scan dimension — tool, version, invocation and retained raw output — is in Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail.

Run transparency — what happened this run

What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.

  • D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
  • D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. File-level freshness contradicts repo activity: 40 commits in the last 90 days, yet 95 of 96 significant files carry no living knowledge. Those two readings cannot both be true, so the per-file recency signal is treated as unreliable here and freshness is not scored for this run.
  • AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via REDACTED (REDACTED). docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped.
  • C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
  • C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'dataset' is imported (finetune/finetune.py:21), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
  • C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'dataset' is imported (finetune/finetune.py:21), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'dataset' is imported (finetune/finetune.py:21), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Python is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Python is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • P5 DR & Backup — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. No backup/snapshot/replication config, RTO/RPO or restore-procedure documentation was found — and no production persistence was detected either (no data-access packages, no data-store services, no database resources), so there is nothing in this repository whose loss a DR control would recover. If this system's data lives in a platform or ops repo we can't see, that's where the DR evidence belongs.
  • X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Dart, Ruby, Scala and PHP source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Dart, Ruby, Scala or PHP was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
  • X3 Exception handling — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 9 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 49.
  • X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax and MSBuild project configuration, TypeScript source and its tsconfig files, Java source and its package and module declarations, PHP source and its PHPStan and Psalm configuration, Dart source and its pubspec language version, Ruby source and its Sorbet and Steep configuration, Scala source and its build's explicit-nulls, WartRemover and Scalafix settings, and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded, no TypeScript was found, and this repository's Python is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.

Limitations & what we did not check

Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.

Per-dimension blind spots

For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.

  • D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
  • D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
  • D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
  • D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
  • D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
  • D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the test suite inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
  • D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
  • D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned REDACTED, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
  • D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a REDACTED (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
  • AC1 Text alternatives: Alt-text is detected structurally — the scan sees that an alternative EXISTS, not whether it meaningfully describes the image, and decorative-vs-missing is judged by attribute shape; runtime-injected images and a non-role=img decorative svg are out of scope. This is accessibility readiness, never a WCAG conformance claim.
  • AC2 Forms & labels: Label association is read from static markup — a label wired up at runtime (JS-set aria-labelledby, framework-injected ids) reads as missing, a present label says nothing about whether its text is correct. A known UI-library field component (e.g. a JSX <TextField>) is now checked conservatively — flagged only when it carries NO label/aria-label/aria-labelledby/id/name — but wrapper/context-labelled libraries (Chakra/Radix FormControl+FormLabel) aren't statically visible (possible false positive) and non-JSX lowercased components are still skipped. A click handler on a plain element is now asked for a name too (it is a control the author declared), but the subtree test that answers it is deliberately generous: any DYNAMIC text expression in the subtree counts as a name, so an icon chosen by a ternary ({cond ? <IconA/> : <IconB/>}) reads as named, and a glyph component from a library the icon-import list does not know still names its parent. A clean result is "no unlabelled control found", not a labelling proof.
  • AC3 Page structure: Page structure is read from the static markup tree — landmarks, headings and lang injected at runtime aren't seen, heading ORDER is checked structurally (not against the rendered visual hierarchy), and lang/title/main fire only on full documents, never partials, and the data-table check sees header-cell presence (a <th> exists), not whether each header correctly associates with its cells. Static readiness, not conformance.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics: Keyboard semantics are inferred from markup attributes — interactivity wired purely in script, focus managed at runtime, and component-level handlers are invisible. A clean result means "no static keyboard-trap shape", not a keyboard-operability proof.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety: Contrast and motion safety are PARTIAL by construction — literal colours (hex/rgb/hsl/named) in inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS top-level declarations are read (same-rule/same-element colour+background pairs only); computed/runtime/theme colour, external-CDN stylesheets, CSS-in-JS dynamic (${…}) and nested-selector colours, cross-element pairs and image contrast stay out of reach, so a clean result is bounded by what the static CSS itself shows.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement: Enforcement is scored from in-repo config/CI evidence only — an a11y gate enforced in external tooling with no in-repo trace can't be credited, and a configured linter is presence, not proof the rules actually run or block a merge.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
  • P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (4): D19, D21, D26, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity5.2 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.

Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

35 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was run.main at 78.

run.main (cyclomatic 78)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/run.py:150
MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:320
MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:549
inference_video.infer_data (cyclomatic 27)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:51
CPMTrainer.prediction_step (cyclomatic 26)finetune/trainer.py:45

+ 30 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Bring the 3 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with run.main (cyclomatic 78), MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36), MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 3 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 5.2 to about 6.8/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 30; a cleaner split scores higher.
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cyclomatic Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.

Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 2.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

108 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was run.main at 199.

run.main (cognitive 199)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/run.py:150
MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:320
MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:549
cgbench.post_process (cognitive 62)REDACTED:361
dataset.preprocess (cognitive 57)finetune/dataset.py:321

+ 103 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Bring the 4 bodies over 60 down to 60 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with run.main (cognitive 199), MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79), MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 4 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 2.0 to about 3.2/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 60; a cleaner split scores higher.
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cognitive Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D3 · God Classes9.1 / 10Stronggated by 5 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").

Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

5 over-large unit(s) detected — types, modules or files that carry too much.

FileTooLong: REDACTED · ×5REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 5 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate God Classes in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D4 · Code Duplication6.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Copy-pasted code that should be shared instead.

Method: Code duplication via token-stream sliding windows with type-aware normalization (locals masked, type names preserved), density-scored per KLoC of production code. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

200 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 20 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted. 22 of the 220 are in trees this repository does not ship — vendored, example/demo, fixture and benchmark code — and are ranked below the shipped groups rather than excluded from them: the duplication there is real and is still counted in this dimension's score. The dimensions that publish a production-file census leave those trees out of theirs, so this count is deliberately drawn over the wider population.

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×8REDACTED:339
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×8eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:226
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×8eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:156
Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×7REDACTED:105
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×7eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/__init__.py:86

+ 121 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 8 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with inference.py (3), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 8 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py (2), cmmmu.py, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 8 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with base.py (2), cmmmu.py, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
  4. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Duplication in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.7 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether a class's methods are focused on a single responsibility.

Method: LCOM4 cohesion per production class with at least two methods: connected components of methods sharing state or calls, computed syntactically. Deterministic, not a proxy.

Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: LCOM4 cohesion computed over every production class — the population is all types, not a name convention.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

1 of 40 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: BaseModel (LCOM4 4)eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:6

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with base.py. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cohesion (LCOM4) in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D8 · Code Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: How much of the code is actually exercised by tests.

Method: Coverage from coverlet runs or committed reports (Cobertura/OpenCover/lcov), computed per-file with structured exclusions for generated, trivial, and glue code. When the suite can't be built/run in-image AND no report is committed, coverage is reported NOT-MEASURED (excluded from the score) with the precondition to make it measurable — never a LoC-ratio proxy folded in as if measured. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

No automated tests — no test code was found in this repository.

No automated tests

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No automated tests finding(s) in Code Coverage. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Coverage in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d8_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D9 · Test Distribution0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.

Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No test suite found.

No tests found

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene8.0 6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether dependencies are current, secure, and not bloated.

Method: Manifest scan via dotnet list package across all projects; worst-signal-per-package deduction (saturating for vulnerabilities, capped-linear for deprecation/outdated) per KLoC. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 75% · ceiling Verified

68 outdated, 0 yanked pinned Python distributions. 74 of 99 shipped distributions were graded against pypi.org (0 not published there, 25 declared without an exact pin, which installs the newest release the declaration admits and so cannot be behind one). Only EXACT pins are graded for currency: a floor or a range already installs the newest release it admits, so reporting one would report this repository for being current. Whether a deliberate upper cap has itself gone stale is a different and weaker question, and is not asked. Whether any distribution is UNMAINTAINED is not graded — PyPI publishes no maintenance status, and release age does not stand in for one. Lockfiles are not read (poetry.lock, uv.lock, Pipfile.lock, pdm.lock), so a lock-resolved install is outside this verdict. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question.

Outdated: accelerate · ×68

What to do

  1. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Dependency Hygiene in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D13 · Secret Scanning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.

Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

D14 · License Compliance8.0 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the licenses of third-party packages are compatible with your policy.

Method: Third-party package licenses resolved from declared package metadata and checked against the configured policy (allow/deny/copyleft). Deterministic; clean = no incompatible license found at metadata depth.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

1 of 287 shipped Python distribution(s) use a banned license. Licences were resolved from PyPI over the distributions a consumer installs — this repository's 99 declared runtime requirement(s) closed transitively over each distribution's published `requires_dist` (188 reached that way). Requirements it states ONLY under an extra, a PEP 735 dependency group, a Poetry dev group or a dev-named requirements file are excluded: pip does not install any of them for a consumer. ★ This repository commits no dependency lockfile that this pass reads, so each licence is the one PyPI publishes for the distribution's CURRENT release rather than for a pinned version. 47 of them publish no licence on PyPI this pass can read; that is missing data, not a violation, and none of them is charged. A further 1 direct requirement(s) are installed from a URL or a version-control checkout and publish no licence this pass can read; they are outside this verdict.

Banned license: frozendict

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Banned license finding(s) in License Compliance. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate License Compliance in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Files that change often and are also complex — the riskiest hotspots.

Method: Per production file churn times cyclomatic complexity over a rolling window, computed from git and Roslyn/JS/Razor analysis. Exhaustive, deterministic per commit date.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

D16 · Bus Factor9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").

Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is web_demos/web_demo_streamlit-minicpmv2_6.py. Counted over 96 of the 118 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1
Further sole-owners (lower concentration)

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt9.9 / 10Stronggated by 8 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.

Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.9 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

8 deducted task-comment markers across 26028 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 9.9. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×4eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:202
HackComment · ×4omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:67

What to do

  1. Resolve the 4 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with REDACTED, trainer.py, omnilmm.py. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 4 HackComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with omnilmm.py (4). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
  3. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Explicit Debt in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d17_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D19 · Documentation QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether the project's documentation is clear, complete, and useful.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic doc sample (READMEs plus first 25 architecture docs), with two-pass stability filtering. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

This repository is well documented with a strong README covering the project's purpose (MiniCPM-V and MiniCPM-o series), release history, an overview of each model's features, installation/build/run instructions for the main API endpoint, finetuning scripts, data preparation, and changelogs. The architecture/design docs are also present but not shown in this summary. All visible documents cover what they claim: the root README states it is about the repository; the eval_mm/README.md and vqaeval/README.md are internal directory READMEs, so their omission of a broader overview does not affect quality. This repository is a comprehensive collection of documentation for the MiniCPM-V and MiniCPM-o series models: READMEs (6), architecture/Docs markdown files (38), and two language-agnostic comparison docs. The READMEs are well written for their directories — each one states what it contains, gives installation/build steps, usage examples, and links to related documentation. The architecture/Docs set is the project's design and reference material; its quality is judged by completeness of content rather than presence in the summary. All visible documents cover the scope: overview (Phi-3 vs MiniCPM-Llama3-V comparison), deployment/training frameworks, model zoo, training best practices, supported languages, and performance benchmarks. This is a comprehensive documentation set for the MiniCPM series (o4.5 and v1-v2), covering an overview of each model, detailed architecture descriptions, performance benchmarks, and usage guides across multiple READMEs. The content is well-organized with clear headings, bulleted features, and a consistent structure that makes it easy to navigate.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

D20 · ADR Quality0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether architecture decisions are recorded well (context, decision, consequences).

Method: Per-ADR judgment by language model at low temperature with two-pass stability; confidence is share of ADRs evaluated; enforcement-field presence detected deterministically. Advisory.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d20_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

What it measures: Whether names — types, methods, variables — are clear and consistent.

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic random symbol sample (fixed size, not exhaustive), with disclosed confidence band. Advisory, sampled.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective Exemplary / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

D26 · Project Cohesion5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether each project is a focused, coherent unit rather than an oversized grab-bag.

Method: Project size overshoot penalties (LoC / public-type count / namespace count, 2-of-3 flag) weighted by log magnitude. Exhaustive across projects, deterministic, LLM-independent.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

1 of 4 build units (Python) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d26_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D28 · Secrets (history)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.

Method: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.

Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.

Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

68 finding(s): 0 critical, 58 high, 8 medium, 2 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 4 file(s) — `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/feature_request.yaml`, `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/llamacpp.yaml`, `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/ollama.yaml`, `.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/vllm.yaml` — so no absence of findings in them is evidence of anything, and nothing in them was analysed. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

+ 1 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 57 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (10), REDACTED (8), REDACTED (6). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (57 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 6 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

Detailed fixes: d29_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependency has a known published vulnerability (CVE), direct or transitive, in ANY ecosystem the repository declares — Dart pub, Elixir and Erlang via Hex, Go modules, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle, JavaScript/npm, .NET/NuGet, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift.

Method: Dependency-CVE scan across every ecosystem the repository declares, scored ONCE. Three sources are unioned and deduplicated by advisory identity (rule id + alias closure, CVE<->GHSA) scoped to package+version, keeping the worst severity: `osv-scanner --recursive` over osv.dev for Dart pub, Elixir/Hex (and Erlang, whose `rebar.lock` syft first converts to a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the lock), Go, Java and Kotlin via Maven/Gradle (and Scala, whose sbt build's pinned direct declarations are written into a CycloneDX SBOM the scanner reads, with rows attributed back to the build file), npm, PHP/Composer, Python/PyPI, RubyGems, Rust/Cargo and Swift; `trivy fs --scanners vuln` for npm lockfiles; and `dotnet list package --vulnerable --include-transitive` for NuGet (with per-advisory collapse of the project x target-framework fan-out), plus a DECLARED-dependency arm that resolves a published gem's gemspec against rubygems.org where no Gemfile.lock is committed. `SeverityScore(c,h,m,l, normalizer 8.0)`. NotApplicable only when NO ecosystem is readable; if any applicable ecosystem could not be scanned the findings are REPORTED and the score is withheld. Supersedes the npm and OSV arms, retired 2026-09-05.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

56 finding(s): 10 critical, 30 high, 15 medium, 1 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

+ 1 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

  1. Resolve the 26 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (19), REDACTED (6), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (26 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 10 Critical CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (6), REDACTED (2), REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (10 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 4 High vulnerability finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 issue-level).

Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.3 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether Dockerfiles / Terraform / Kubernetes config follow security best practices.

Method: IaC/container misconfiguration scan via trivy config (REDACTED/Terraform/K8s/Helm/CloudFormation); severity rules to 0-10 moderate normalizer. NotApplicable without manifests. Exhaustive, deterministic.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

5 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 3 medium, 1 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 3 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 Low IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D35 · Change Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.

Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.

Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

D43 · Malicious Dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether any dependency the repository declares is published as MALICIOUS rather than merely vulnerable — a package that is an attacker's work, in any ecosystem osv-scanner reads. Scored apart from D30 because the answer is binary: there is no safe version to upgrade to, and the fix is to remove the package and rotate every credential it could have read.

Method: The same dependency scan D30 reads, partitioned on the scanner's own classification rather than rescanned: a row is MALICIOUS when its id is in the `MAL-` space (the ossf/malicious-packages feed) OR its `database_specific.cwe_ids` carries `CWE-506` ("Embedded Malicious Code"). Both channels are structural; the summary text is deliberately NOT read, because a malicious-package record whose summary says only "Critical severity vulnerability" is a real shape ([GHSA redacted]) and a text matcher misses it. Scored BINARY: any surviving row is 0, whatever its severity and however many CVEs sit beside it — a hostile dependency is not a quantity. Applicability and degradation are D30's: NotApplicable only when no ecosystem is readable, and an unscannable ecosystem degrades rather than reading clean. SCORED, not informational.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No dependency in any ecosystem this repository declares is published as malicious.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

D44 · Platform End-of-Life10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether anyone still ships security patches for the platform this repository RUNS ON — the runtime it pins and the framework majors its own constraints hold it to. Separate from D12 because the question differs: a current Django on an end-of-life Python is perfectly up to date and completely unsupported, and the fix is a migration rather than a version bump. What the repository says it merely SUPPORTS is never charged.

Method: End-of-life PLATFORM read from the repository's own declarations and graded against a FROZEN, dated table of vendor support dates — no network, no feed, no API, so this dimension answers identically inside a closed scan fence. Two subjects: a RUNTIME the project pins (a single or all-end-of-life TargetFramework, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a requires-python CAP) and a FRAMEWORK major a dependency constraint cannot move off (a caret, tilde or exact version; `vue@^2.7.16` pins Vue 2). A FLOOR is deliberately never charged — `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what a package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on — and a multi-target project is charged only when EVERY target is out of support. Runtime 4.0/product capped 8.0, framework 1.5 capped 4.5. The table is safe to freeze because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false: it loses recall as it ages, never precision, and a test asserts every entry predates the freeze date. Disjoint from D31 (a container image's OS layer) and D29 (the toolchain a CI workflow installs). Abstains when the repository declares no platform this pass reads — never scores it clean.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 0 platform declaration(s) and 99 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

R = React/JS · M = Maturity · P = Readiness.

AC1 · Text alternatives2.1 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether non-text content carries a text alternative — img/area/input[type=image] have alt, a meaningful svg has a title or aria-label, video has a captions track, and object/embed/canvas have a name or fallback content. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: every img/area/input[type=image] checked for alt, svg[role=img] for a title/aria-label, video for a captions <track>. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: image/media elements — img, area, input[type=image], svg, video, object, embed, canvas — across the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and dynamic-attribute elements are skipped. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is NOT read by any producer, so it contributes no element to this population; where such a frontend is present the card discloses it as an analyzer gap rather than scoring around it.

  • An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative. (×7) — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/IdeasList/index.vue:4, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:4, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:5, …

What to do

  • Add a text alternative — alt on images (alt="" for purely decorative ones), a title or aria-label on meaningful svg, an aria-label or inner fallback content on canvas, and a captions <track> on video.
AC2 · Forms & labels10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Accessibility — Whether form controls have a programmatic label (an associated label, aria-label or aria-labelledby), buttons have text, links have an accessible name, a click handler on a plain element names the control it declares, fieldsets have a non-empty legend, known UI-library field components carry a label prop, and a placeholder isn't used as the only label. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: inputs/selects/textareas checked for an associated label[for]/wrapping label/aria-label/aria-labelledby (per document), buttons for accessible text, fieldsets for a legend; placeholder-only labelling flagged. Deterministic, hard fact per control.

Coverage: Population: form controls, buttons, links, fieldsets and known UI-library field components in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx); components, hidden subtrees and spread/dynamic-attribute elements are skipped, so a control whose label arrives through a spread or a runtime expression is deliberately not judged. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

AC3 · Page structure3.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether pages declare a language (well-formed BCP-47) and a non-empty title, expose exactly one main landmark and a sane heading order with non-empty headings, keep zoom enabled, title their iframes, give data tables header cells, and avoid meta-refresh. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: html lang, document <title>, a main landmark and heading order on full documents only, plus zoom-disabling viewports, untitled iframes and meta-refresh anywhere. Deterministic, per structural checkpoint.

Coverage: Population: the PARSED MARKUP documents (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx). The page-level checks — lang, title, single main landmark — fire ONCE PER FULL DOCUMENT (an <html> root) and never on a partial or component fragment, so a repo of fragments is assessed only on the per-element checks (heading order, table headers, iframe titles, meta-refresh, zoom). Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

  • No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. This document's body is only the mount point <div id="app">, so there is no content here to wrap — render the <main> from the component mounted into it. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/index.html:2
  • user-scalable=no/0 or a maximum-scale below 2 stops low-vision users zooming to 200%. Remove the zoom restriction from the viewport meta. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/index.html:6
  • An iframe with no title (or an empty one) is announced only as "frame". Add a non-empty title describing its content, or an aria-label. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue:43

What to do

  • Declare <html lang>, a document <title> and a <main> landmark, keep headings in order, leave zoom enabled, title iframes and drop meta-refresh.
AC4 · Keyboard semantics1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether interactive behaviour is keyboard-reachable — no click handler on a non-interactive element lacking a role, tabindex and key handler, no element the repo's own CSS styles `cursor: pointer` without giving it any of the three, no unfocusable element whose only binding is a mouse enter/leave pair or a double-click, no positive tabindex, no href-less anchor, no placeholder-href (#/javascript) link acting as a button. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup-model scan: click handlers on non-interactive elements lacking role+tabindex+key handler, positive tabindex values, and href-less anchors. Components skipped, spreads suppressed. Deterministic, hard fact per element.

Coverage: Population: elements that pose a keyboard-semantics question, in the PARSED MARKUP files only (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx) — a non-natively-interactive element carrying a click handler, a double-click or hover enter/leave binding, a pointer-only gesture on a tabindex="0" element, or `cursor: pointer` from the repo's own CSS; an href-less or placeholder-href (#, javascript:) anchor; and any element with a positive tabindex. Natively interactive elements used correctly (<button>, <a href>, form controls) are NOT in the population — there is nothing to judge — so a page of nothing but correct controls gives AC4 nothing to measure. Keyboard reachability is judged from the markup, never from a rendered page. ★ An interactive element declared in a tagged-template (html`…`) or hyperscript frontend is NOT in this population — no producer reads either — so an empty population is reported as an analyzer gap, never as "this repository has no interactive elements".

  • A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabindex="0" + a key handler. (×5) — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:3, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:7, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue:9, …

What to do

  • Make custom controls keyboard-operable (role + tabindex + key handler), drop positive tabindex, and give anchors a real href.
AC6 · Visual & motion safety5.1 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether focus outlines aren't removed without a replacement, motion respects prefers-reduced-motion, and literal CSS colour pairs meet contrast — PARTIAL: inline styles, in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files, var() tokens, Tailwind neutral utilities and CSS-in-JS literals are read (hex/rgb/hsl/named), never computed/runtime/external-CDN colour. Static markup readiness, not a WCAG conformance claim.

Method: Static markup/CSS scan: inline outline:none/0, literal inline colour/background contrast against the 4.5:1 AA floor, and <style>-block animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard. Deterministic but PARTIAL — only inline styles and in-repo CSS literals are visible.

Coverage: Population: styled elements in the PARSED MARKUP files (.html/.htm/.cshtml/.razor/.vue/.svelte/.jsx/.tsx), plus in-repo <style> blocks, in-repo .css files and CSS-in-JS literals. Colour contrast is computed from LITERAL colour pairs only (hex/rgb/hsl/named, including var() tokens and Tailwind neutral utilities) — computed, runtime-themed and external-CDN colour is never resolved, so this is a partial read of contrast by construction. Markup built in script — tagged-template (html`…`) UIs and hyperscript DOM factories — is not read at all.

  • `:focus-visible` sets the outline to none/0 and no visible :focus / :focus-visible style for that element replaces it in this stylesheet, so a keyboard user cannot see where focus is. Draw a focus ring (outline, box-shadow or border) under :focus-visible. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/styles/main.css:29
  • `.bar` moves (`transition: height 0.1s, background-color 0.1s`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/Voice/index.vue:133

What to do

  • Keep a visible focus style (don't remove the outline without a replacement), guard animation with prefers-reduced-motion, and raise low-contrast colour pairs to at least 4.5:1.
AC7 · A11y enforcement4.0 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Accessibility — Whether accessibility is ENFORCED in the toolchain — an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set, e.g. eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y or vuejs-accessibility where the project lints JavaScript) and an automated accessibility assertion wired into tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or an equivalent) — on the Documented→Verified→Prevented ladder.

Method: Repo config/CI scan: an accessibility checker configured over the markup (an a11y lint rule set such as eslint-plugin-jsx-a11y / vuejs-accessibility where JavaScript is linted) and an automated accessibility assertion in tests or CI (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse or equivalent), graded on the Documented→Verified→Prevented rungs. Deterministic, presence/rung detection.

Coverage: Population: the repository's own tooling configuration — lint config, test and CI files — NOT the markup. It is read for a configured accessibility checker and an automated accessibility assertion (axe/pa11y/Lighthouse, or a native-toolkit equivalent), and it credits an INVOCATION, never a mention: a licence filename, an import comment or a doc reference earns no rung. Enforcement configured entirely outside the repository leaves no evidence here and cannot be credited.

  • No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-vuejs-accessibility) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 22 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

What to do

  • Enforce accessibility in the toolchain: add eslint-plugin-vuejs-accessibility, then assert with your test runner's axe binding (jest-axe, vitest-axe, cypress-axe or @axe-core/playwright) in tests, then gate axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in CI.
AX10 · Code composition9.8 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.

Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.

Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.

What to do

  • The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
AX3 · Project dependency cycles10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).

Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.

AX4 · Dependency direction10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.

Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.

M1 · Documentation (README)8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.

Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.

What to do

  • Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
  • Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
  • Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
M2 · Architecture documentation2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.

Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.

What to do

  • Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
M3 · Folder & project structure6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo is organised deliberately — src/test separation and consistent project naming.

Method: Filesystem scan: src/test folder separation and namespace-prefix consistency (majority RootNamespace agreement). Exhaustive across projects, deterministic.

  • Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.

What to do

  • Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
  • Start a test surface where your build system looks for one (tests/, test/, spec/, or your ecosystem's test source set) — the separation follows from putting the first tests in the right place.
M4 · Documentation accuracy0.0 / 10Critical◐ Sampled · advisory

Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).

Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.

  • docs/deployment_en.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/deployment_en.md:158
  • docs/deployment_zh.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — docs/deployment_zh.md:157
  • eval_mm/README.md runs `./scripts/run_inference.sh $MODELNAME $DATALIST`, but `scripts/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README.md:23
  • eval_mm/README.md names `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py`, but no file or folder `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README.md:39
  • eval_mm/README.md runs `./shell/run_inference.sh`, but `shell/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README.md:107
  • eval_mm/README.md runs `./shell/run_transform.sh`, but `shell/run_transform.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README.md:173
  • eval_mm/README_zh.md runs `./scripts/run_inference.sh $MODELNAME $DATALIST`, but `scripts/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README_zh.md:24
  • eval_mm/README_zh.md names `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py`, but no file or folder `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README_zh.md:40
  • eval_mm/README_zh.md runs `./shell/run_inference.sh`, but `shell/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README_zh.md:107
  • eval_mm/README_zh.md runs `./shell/run_transform.sh`, but `shell/run_transform.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/README_zh.md:171
  • eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/README.md documents the environment variable `SUB_OUTPUT_DIR`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/README.md:16

What to do

  • Reconcile the README with reality: docs/deployment_en.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; docs/deployment_zh.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it; eval_mm/README.md runs `./scripts/run_inference.sh $MODELNAME $DATALIST`, but `scripts/run_inference.sh` does not exist; eval_mm/README.md names `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py`, but no file or folder `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py` exists; eval_mm/README.md runs `./shell/run_inference.sh`, but `shell/run_inference.sh` does not exist.
P1 · CI/CD gates0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.

Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.

What to do

  • Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
P10 · Library API & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.

Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

P2 · Observability7.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether the code is diagnosable in production — structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks.

Method: Filesystem/Roslyn scan: structured-logging frameworks (Serilog, NLog), OpenTelemetry, and health-check endpoint patterns. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • Only 3/4 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `eval_mm/vqaeval`.

What to do

  • Extend structured logging to the remaining runnable modules so everything you run is diagnosable in production.
  • Add OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (opentelemetry-sdk) so requests are traceable across the system, not just health-probable.
P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).

Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add bandit, `semgrep --config=p/python`, or CodeQL's python pack — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

What to do

  • Run what this repository's stack ships: bandit, `semgrep --config=p/python`, or CodeQL's python pack — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
  • Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
  • Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are automated and safely reversible (probes, rolling updates, approval gates) — from manifests/pipeline files, not the live environment.

Method: Filesystem scan: deployment manifests/IaC (K8s YAML, Helm, Terraform) for rolling updates, probes, approval gates, migration hooks. Exhaustive, deterministic.

What to do

  • Nothing pauses a release for a human: publish as a draft release (or gate the release job on a protected tag/manual dispatch) so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.
P6 · Release Hygiene5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether releases are traceable — a maintained changelog and explicit version stamping.

Method: Filesystem scan: changelog file presence and version tags in csproj or git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.

  • No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)

What to do

  • Keep a changelog (e.g. Keep-a-Changelog) recording what shipped in each release.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Performance — Whether asynchronous code stays responsive — it avoids sync-over-async blocking (a .NET .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult(), a time.sleep or blocking HTTP call inside a Python coroutine, a *Sync call inside an async JavaScript function, block_on inside a Rust async fn, runBlocking inside a Kotlin suspend function, block() inside a Reactor publisher) that stalls a thread or event loop and risks deadlock, and, where the code is a reusable library on .NET, awaits with ConfigureAwait(false) so it never captures and stalls its caller's context.

Method: Production-source scan: sync-over-async blocking counted everywhere — .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() in .NET; off .NET, read from the language model, a blocking call inside an async function (Python, TS/JS, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, Dart) or inside a Java method returning a Reactor Mono/Flux or a Scala method returning a Future or effect — and, for a .NET library with ≥5 awaits, the share of awaits using ConfigureAwait(false). Deterministic, syntax/text detection.

R1 · Type Safety0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.

Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.

  • 0 typed · 37 plain JS — the untyped files are web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/App.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/apis/index.js, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/CallHeader/index.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/CountDown/index.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/DelayTips/index.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ExtraInfo/index.vue (+31 more).

What to do

  • Adopt TypeScript for the frontend: add a typecheck step to the build, then either type-check the existing JavaScript in place (`checkJs`/JSDoc types) or convert the highest-traffic modules first — no file is typed today, so this is an adoption, not a clean-up.
R10 · Code Duplication9.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.

Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.

  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:63 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:68 — these 2 files are line-for-line copies of one another — 485 lines are identical, in the same order, in every one of them — so this is one fact about the file set, not a block to extract. An edit made to one file and not the others changes behaviour silently, which is the failure a wholesale copy guarantees. Pick one file as the single source and derive the others from it (re-export it, spread it into the local overrides each variant genuinely needs, or generate the copies at build time) — the few lines that differ between the files are exactly the part each variant should still own. Check first whether the copies are deliberately standalone deliverables (a translation file seeded from its sibling and waiting to be translated); where they are, the duplication is the design, and the honest move is to mark the seeded file as untranslated rather than to let it pass as done. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:63
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:50 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:54 — these 2 files are line-for-line copies of one another — 414 lines are identical, in the same order, in every one of them — so this is one fact about the file set, not a block to extract. An edit made to one file and not the others changes behaviour silently, which is the failure a wholesale copy guarantees. Pick one file as the single source and derive the others from it (re-export it, spread it into the local overrides each variant genuinely needs, or generate the copies at build time) — the few lines that differ between the files are exactly the part each variant should still own. Check first whether the copies are deliberately standalone deliverables (a translation file seeded from its sibling and waiting to be translated); where they are, the duplication is the design, and the honest move is to mark the seeded file as untranslated rather than to let it pass as done. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:50
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:77 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:64 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 1701 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:77
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:184 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue:215 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:184
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:215 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue:246 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/SelectTimbre/index.vue:53 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:215
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useVoice.js:21 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/merge.js:44 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useVoice.js:21

What to do

  • Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.

Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.

  • onmessage has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. (×4) — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:449, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:442, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:367, …
  • stopRecording has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 9; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. (×2) — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:368, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:361

What to do

  • Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
R3 · Large Files4.6 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.

Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.

  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue has 950 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue has 945 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue has 813 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue has 810 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue has 450 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue:1

What to do

  • Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
R4 · Test Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.

Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.

  • 0% of 36 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count

What to do

  • Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).
R6 · Tooling3.3 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.

Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.

  • test ✗ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.

What to do

  • Add a test runner (vitest / jest / playwright) and type checking (adopt TypeScript, or type-check the existing JavaScript with `checkJs`) as package.json scripts and run them in CI.
R7 · Dead Code0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).

Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.

  • Unreachable from the 2 application, 3 tooling and 0 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. Gate removals on `npm run build` — an undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
  • no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it (×4) — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue, …
  • no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make (×27) — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue, …
  • no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 4 in-repo import(s) from 4 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue and 1 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/merge.js
  • no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/index.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/menu/index.js
  • no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useHttp.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useRandomId.js
  • no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/guard/index.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/guard/stateGuard.js

What to do

  • Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene7.5 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.

Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.

  • Declared in web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it. (×3)

What to do

  • Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.
R9 · Circular Imports10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.

Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.

S1 · Web-Security Posture8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Only what this repository's own non-C# files could be read for was assessed — and because this repository commits the configuration that serves its own HTTP surface, that configuration could be read in full for the security response headers it sets. Nothing else in this dimension was assessed: the transport, cookie, input-validation and crypto controls are read from a source model that was not loaded for this repository’s language, so their absence here is not a finding about this repository.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: HSTS/security headers, secure cookies, input validation, middleware order, weak crypto (MD5/SHA1/DES); HTTPS-metadata context-aware. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir source itself (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not) for the arms that hold whether or not the code serves HTTP: a weak hash or cipher, key material fixed in the source, a TLS client that accepts any certificate, and (JavaScript/TypeScript, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Elixir) an obsolete TLS version; the server controls are not assessed there, and a Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Elixir repository that serves no HTTP of its own is N/A on them. Deterministic.

  • None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is configured — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. This is reported because `REDACTED` is committed to this repository and declares the server that serves it, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.) — REDACTED:62

What to do

  • Set security response headers on the surface this repository serves: an `add_header` directive per header in the nginx/Caddy/Apache config, a `_headers` / `vercel.json` / `netlify.toml` entry for a static host, or `helmet()` in the HTTP server. `Content-Security-Policy` is the one that pays for itself first — it is what contains an injected script once one reaches the page — followed by `X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff` and a frame policy (`X-Frame-Options: DENY`, or CSP `frame-ancestors`). Where the app is served from a build container, the header configuration belongs in the image beside the built assets, so it ships with them rather than depending on where it lands.
X1 · Async correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether the code avoids sync-over-async (deadlock-prone blocking on tasks) and async void.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: async methods scanned for .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult() and async-void outside event handlers. Deterministic, hard fact per invocation.

X12 · Unreachable branch10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether any branch is dead by construction — a switch arm whose label can never equal a case-normalised subject, or an `else if` whose predicate the arm above has already swallowed.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: switch labels compared against the subject's own case normaliser, and if/else-if chains checked for a literal an earlier arm's containment test already swallows. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X13 · Undrained process stream10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a child process that has BOTH standard streams redirected drains both — reading one to the end while the other is never read deadlocks once the child fills the unread pipe.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: ProcessStartInfo launches with both streams redirected, checked for a drain of each stream across the enclosing type. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `spawn` imported from `child_process` whose stdout and stderr are both pipes (no options, no `stdio`, or `stdio` of `'pipe'`), bound to a local that never leaves its scope, where exactly one of the two streams is read, the other never, and the child’s `close`/`exit` (or the read stream’s end) is awaited; a shell redirect in the call’s arguments or a `kill` of the child suppresses it. The same rule reads Python’s `subprocess.Popen`, Dart’s `Process.start`, Ruby’s `Open3.popen3`, and Scala’s JDK process starts (`new ProcessBuilder(…).start()` with no `redirectErrorStream`/`redirectError`/`redirectOutput`/`inheritIO`, `Runtime.getRuntime.exec`) where one of `getInputStream`/`getErrorStream` is read and the other never while `waitFor()` is called or the read stream is read to its end. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X14 · Bypassable address classification10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X17 · Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether a walk that recurses through a JSON/XML tree handed in by its caller bounds how deep it will go — an uncapped walk lets the document's nesting choose the stack depth, and the resulting StackOverflowException cannot be caught.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that take a JSON/XML document node and call themselves with a child of it, reachable from an externally-callable member of the same type that accepts a document, checked for any depth parameter, descent counter or threaded arithmetic anywhere in the walk. On a repository with no .NET source it reads TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths and `.d.ts` not) with the same rule: a function or method with a parameter typed as a document value — `unknown`, `any`, `object`, `Record<string, unknown|any>`, a JSON alias (`JsonValue`, `JSONObject`, …) or a DOM node global the file does not rebind — that calls itself (bare, or through `this` for a method, or hands itself to a call over the value as in `value.map(walk)`) with something it took out of that value and never through an ancestor accessor such as `closest()` or `parentElement`, that is exported or reached from an exported function (a public method of the same exported class) taking such a value, and that names no depth, level, nesting, recursion, remaining or budget anywhere and threads no `+`/`-` arithmetic through a self-call. Plain JavaScript is not read: with no annotation nothing tells a parsed document from a tree the code built itself. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X19 · Unrestored process-global state10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X21 · Side-effecting pattern guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X22 · Contradicted release guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.

Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.

Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X24 · Document value interpolated into markup unescaped10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Security — Whether text read out of the document being converted is escaped before it is written into generated markup — a value the document's author chose, interpolated into an attribute the surrounding literal delimits, can close that attribute and open another.

Method: Roslyn semantic model over the whole compilation: a string-typed `Value`/`InnerText`/`InnerXml`/`Text` member declared inside `DocumentFormat.OpenXml` or `System.Xml` is a taint SOURCE, propagated through assignments, returns, arguments, tuple elements and string composition to its transitive closure, then read at interpolated-string holes that sit in a markup position the surrounding literal itself delimits. Escaper/encoder calls and enclosing validator conditions cut the flow. Flow- and container-insensitive by construction. A second arm needs no provenance at all and reports a type that CONTRADICTS ITSELF — the same expression escaped at one delimited markup hole and interpolated raw at another hole in the same markup position of the same type, which the type's own escaping proves is a defect without knowing where the value came from. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the token stream with the same rule: a DOM read of raw document text (`getAttribute`, `textContent`, `innerText`, `nodeValue`) is the source, propagated through local bindings and string composition, and judged at template-literal and concatenation holes in the same two delimited markup positions; escapers and validating conditions cut it, and documentation-site, test, vendored and minified scripts are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X25 · Inert configuration knob10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.

Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X26 · Unsynchronised callback handoff10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a value handed from a callback to the body that waits on it crosses on something built to be crossed — a `Queue<T>`/`List<T>`/`Dictionary<K,V>` written inside an event handler and read back outside it is mutated by two flows at once, and the semaphore or completion source beside it orders how MANY items exist while leaving the collection's own head, tail and backing array unprotected.

Method: Roslyn syntax: method, accessor, local-function and lambda bodies that declare BOTH a non-thread-safe generic collection (`Queue`/`Stack`/`List`/`Dictionary`/`HashSet`/`Sorted*`/`LinkedList`) and a synchronisation primitive (`SemaphoreSlim`/`TaskCompletionSource`/`ManualResetEvent(Slim)`/`AutoResetEvent`/`CountdownEvent`) as locals, then read for a `+=`-registered lambda that raises that primitive while the body outside every lambda waits on it — and, in that scope, a mutating call on the collection inside the lambda paired with a mention of it outside. Any `lock` in the scope abstains it. On a repository with no .NET source the same handoff is read in Java off the engine’s own token stream (test source sets, vendored and demonstration paths not): an `ArrayList`/`LinkedList`/`ArrayDeque`/`PriorityQueue`/`Hash*`/`LinkedHash*`/`Tree*` local and a `CountDownLatch`/`Semaphore`/`CompletableFuture` local, a lambda or anonymous class that raises the primitive and mutates the collection, and a wait outside it; any `synchronized` or `lock()` abstains the body. Because each of those primitives orders what the callback wrote before raising it, only a touch that provably overlaps the callback is convicted: one after the registration and before the next wait, or one in a loop registered-before, waiting on every pass and not declaring the collection. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X27 · Collection changed while being enumerated10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a `for` loop leaves the `dict`, `set` or `deque` it is walking alone — CPython's iterators over those check that the collection has not changed size since the loop began, so a body that removes from (or empties) the very collection the loop is walking makes the next step raise `RuntimeError: dictionary changed size during iteration` and the remaining items are never seen.

Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: `foreach` statements whose body calls a structural mutator (`Add`/`Remove`/`Clear`/`Insert`/…) on the very expression the loop is enumerating. Two arms. ARM A — the source is a concrete fragile BCL collection, or a live `Keys`/`Values` view over one, and the mutator resolves to that same collection's own member; concurrent and immutable collections and arrays are outside the population by construction, since their enumerators survive a structural change. ARM B — the source is an argument-less accessor CALL on a receiver whose body is in source: the accessor must return a stored field VERBATIM and a sibling member must structurally change that same field, both read off the implementations rather than from the members' names. A mutation the loop provably exits immediately after (`break`/`return`/`throw`/`goto`), or one written inside a nested loop or a lambda, is counted and never reported. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a condition that tests a value for emptiness indexes that same value only where the test holds — an `||` written one parenthesis too far to the left leaves an index access outside the guard beside it, so the empty case the guard exists to anticipate reaches the index and throws.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: the OUTERMOST `&&`/`||` of every boolean condition, read for a symbol the condition tests for emptiness (`string.IsNullOrEmpty`/`IsNullOrWhiteSpace`, a `Length`/`Count` comparison against a literal, `Any()`, a `Length`/`Count` pattern, or a comparison against `""`) and ALSO indexes. Each `symbol[...]` access is placed by a boolean-reachability walk from the access up to the outermost connective: an access is COVERED when some enclosing step has it in the right operand and the left operand, under the truth value that step forces, proves the symbol non-empty — a recursion over `&&`/`||` whose true- and false-directions are asymmetric. A finding needs BOTH an uncovered access and a covered one on the same symbol in the same condition, which is the agreeing twin that separates a misplaced parenthesis from an unrelated length test. Bare index accesses with no emptiness test in the condition are neither counted nor reported; a non-identifier receiver and a lambda nested inside the condition are outside the population. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X3 · Exception handling3.8 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether exceptions are handled rather than silently swallowed or rethrown with lost stack traces.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every catch clause counted; empty catches and bare rethrows flagged. Population is all catch clauses, not estimated. Deterministic, hard fact.

  • `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. (×17) — chat.py:119, chat.py:148, chat.py:172, …
  • `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. (×15) — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:89, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:163, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:244, …
  • An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×8) — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:171, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:178, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:186, …

What to do

  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded)
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

X4 · Structured logging3.5 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal`/`verbose`/`silly`/`http`/`log` call on a receiver named for a logger, in a package whose own or an enclosing `package.json` declares a logger that carries values as fields (pino, pino-http, nestjs-pino, Fastify, winston, bunyan, tslog, LogTape, roarr), whose first deciding argument is a template literal with substitutions; an object-literal fields argument is stepped over, a plain string message clears the call. Python is read the same way: a `debug`/`info`/`warning`/`error`/`exception`/`critical`/`log` call on a logger in a file that imports the standard library’s `logging` or structlog (loguru, which formats at the call, is not judged), whose message is a whole f-string with a non-constant field; a `%`-formatted, `.format()`-ed or concatenated message is not convicted, as in C#. PHP is read the same way: a PSR-3 level call (`emergency`…`debug`, `log`) on a logger (`$logger`, `$this->logger`, Laravel’s `Log::`, `logger()`, `\Drupal::logger()`) in a package whose `composer.json` requires a PSR-3 logger or a framework that hands one out (psr/log, Monolog, Laravel, Symfony, Drupal, CakePHP), or a file that imports one, whose message is a double-quoted string interpolating a variable; a single-quoted message clears the call, and `sprintf` or `.` concatenation is not convicted, as in C#. Dart is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on Sentry’s structured logger (`Sentry.logger`) whose message is a whole string literal interpolating a value (`$name`, `${…}`); the `Sentry.logger.fmt` template API clears the call. Dart that logs only through loggers with one message and no fields (package:logging, package:logger, talker, dart:developer) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Ruby is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on the console gem’s `Console` (declared by a Gemfile, gemspec or Gemfile.lock, or required) or, where SemanticLogger, Ougai or dry-logger is declared or required, on a receiver named for a logger (`logger`, `@logger`, `Rails.logger`, `log`), whose first deciding argument is, as the whole argument, a double-quoted string interpolating a non-constant value (`#{…}`, `#@ivar`); a plain literal clears the call, keyword arguments are the fields, and a block, `%`-format or `+` concatenation is not convicted. Ruby that logs only through the standard Logger (Rails.logger) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Deterministic.

  • `warning` at line 102 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog. — REDACTED:102
  • `error` at line 170 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.error("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.error("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog. — REDACTED:170
  • `error` at line 212 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.error("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.error("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog. — REDACTED:212
  • `info` at line 220 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.info("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.info("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog. — REDACTED:220
  • `warning` at line 212 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog. — REDACTED:212
  • `warning` at line 220 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog. — REDACTED:220
  • `warning` at line 150 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog. — finetune/dataset.py:150

What to do

  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging

WCAG coverage — what static analysis assessed

Statically assessed 15 of 55 WCAG 2.2 Level A/AA success criteria (27%; ≈30% of the 50 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria for EN 301 549). The other 40 require runtime or manual evaluation. Partial signal only (a clean result is necessary, not sufficient; static analysis fully verifies none). This is accessibility readiness, not a conformance claim — a WCAG conformance claim requires manual evaluation (WCAG-EM 1.0).

DimensionWCAG 2.2 A/AA criteriaCoverage
AC1 · Text alternatives1.1.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.5Partial signal
AC2 · Forms & labels1.3.1, 3.3.2, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC3 · Page structure1.4.4, 2.2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 3.1.1, 4.1.2Partial signal
AC4 · Keyboard semantics2.1.1, 2.4.3Partial signal
AC6 · Visual & motion safety1.4.3, 2.4.7Partial — literal CSS only
AC7 · A11y enforcementenforcement — no page criterionEnforcement posture (process)

Not statically assessed — these 40 Level A/AA criteria need runtime or manual evaluation (WCAG-EM): 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.3.4, 1.3.5, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.4.5, 1.4.10, 1.4.11, 1.4.12, 1.4.13, 2.1.2, 2.1.4, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, 2.4.4, 2.4.5, 2.4.6, 2.4.11, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 2.5.4, 2.5.7, 2.5.8, 3.1.2, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.6, 3.3.1, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.7, 3.3.8, 4.1.3.

Reference — by lens

The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health29%Weak — gated by D2, R1, R7, X3, X4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture94%ExemplarySolid.
Maturity37%Weak — gated by M2, M4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness16%Critical — gated by D8, D9, R4, R6, P1, P3Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security72%Adequate — gated by D29, D30Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Accessibility30%Weak — gated by AC1, AC3, AC4Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance100%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Unscored — 2 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.

  • X10 Duplicated predicate — 25 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — 4 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.

  • C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'dataset' (finetune/finetune.py:21) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Django, SQLAlchemy, SQLModel, Peewee, Tortoise and MongoEngine model fields, Alembic and Django migration columns, CREATE TABLE and ALTER TABLE … ADD columns in SQL files). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether its changes need an audit trail could not be established, and the trail's absence is not scored.
  • C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'dataset' (finetune/finetune.py:21) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Django, SQLAlchemy, SQLModel, Peewee, Tortoise and mongoengine model fields, Alembic and Django migration columns, SQL schemas). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether a retention limit applies here could not be established, and its absence is not scored.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'dataset' (finetune/finetune.py:21) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Django, SQLAlchemy, SQLModel, Peewee, Tortoise and mongoengine model fields, Alembic and Django migration columns, CREATE TABLE and ALTER TABLE … ADD columns in SQL files). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether data-subject rights apply here could not be established, and their absence is not scored.
  • P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 54 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.

  • AC5 ARIA correctness — No ARIA usage found in the parsed markup — AC5 not applicable here.
  • AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's Python imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
  • AX2 Stateful singletons — No container singleton was found, so there is no shared instance for concurrent requests to race on. No function in this Python code is served by a threaded web framework (a Flask, Bottle or FastAPI route, a Django or Pyramid view), so no module is shared between request threads. TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
  • AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — docker build failed (exit 1) — DEPRECATED: The legacy builder is deprecated and will be removed in a future release. Install the buildx component to build images with BuildKit: https://docs.docker.com/go/bui…; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
  • C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
  • C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — this repository registers no route and starts no server another machine can reach (no Flask/FastAPI/Starlette route, Django urlpatterns or class-based view, Tornado handler). Access control is therefore N/A here — a library or command-line tool is authorized by the application that serves it, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
  • D10 Test Quality — No tests were found in the analyzed repository to assess for quality.
  • D11 Test Reliability — No test suite was found to re-run, so reliability couldn't be assessed. Two searches produced that zero and both came back empty: the classifier that reads the loaded workspace recognised no suite it could run, and a walk of the source on disk — which covers the JS/TS `*.test.*` and `*.spec.*` conventions and probes for a Pester suite — found no test source in any other ecosystem either. Neither search reaches a suite that is missing from the loaded workspace and carries no name either walk recognises, so this is 'no suite found by those two searches', not a verdict that the repository has none.
  • D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.py), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness — knowledge concentrated in recent work — freshness signal contradicted by repo activity
  • D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
  • D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
  • D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D5 Coupling — Not applicable — this Python build ships 1 production module(s), so there is no coupling BETWEEN modules to measure. (Its test and non-production modules are not part of the shipped graph.)
  • D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
  • DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (10 value object(s))
  • ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
  • ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
  • GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
  • IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
  • P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the Python source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
  • P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (`coverage run -m pytest` then `coverage xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
  • PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for a pytest-benchmark or pytest-codspeed dependency with tests taking the `benchmark` fixture, an asv.conf.json with its `time_`/`mem_`/`peakmem_` benchmarks, or a pyperf Runner, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
  • PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: Python runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
  • R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
  • R5 Dependency Freshness — uses a pnpm lockfile — dependency freshness not measured here; JS/npm CVEs are scored in D30 (Dependency Vulnerabilities), which answers every ecosystem
  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's Python was read, and no request in it can be cancelled by a caller — a Python request takes no token: asyncio cancels the task and trio or anyio the scope that made it, from outside the call, and requests, httpx, aiohttp and gRPC take a timeout, not a cancellation
  • X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check asks whether an argument guard reports an EMPTY value as a NULL one, which needs a language that throws a null-specific argument exception — .NET's ArgumentNullException, the JVM's NullPointerException, Dart's ArgumentError.notNull. This repository contains none of those languages: the ones it is written in have a single exception for a bad argument, so there is no pair of exceptions to confuse and nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.

Critical — 114 finding(s)
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 32 more in this group — see findings.md.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×26
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • + 1 more in this group — see findings.md.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE · ×10
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AC1 · Text alternatives · <img> without a text alternative · ×7
  • <img> without a text alternative web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/IdeasList/index.vue:4 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
  • <img> without a text alternative web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:4 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
  • <img> without a text alternative web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:5 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
  • <img> without a text alternative web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:8 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
  • <img> without a text alternative web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:9 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
  • <img> without a text alternative web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:6 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
  • <img> without a text alternative web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:6 — An image with no alt (and no aria-label/aria-labelledby) is unreadable to assistive tech. Add alt — alt="" if it's purely decorative.
AC4 · Keyboard semantics · Click handler on a non-interactive <div> · ×5
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:3 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabindex="0" + a key handler.
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue:7 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabindex="0" + a key handler.
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue:9 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabindex="0" + a key handler.
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue:22 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabindex="0" + a key handler.
  • Click handler on a non-interactive <div> web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue:28 — A click handler on a plain element isn't keyboard-operable. Use a <button>, or add role + tabindex="0" + a key handler.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High vulnerability · ×4
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
AC3 · Page structure · Viewport restricts zoom · ×1
  • Viewport restricts zoom web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/index.html:6 — user-scalable=no/0 or a maximum-scale below 2 stops low-vision users zooming to 200%. Remove the zoom restriction from the viewport meta.
AC3 · Page structure · <iframe> without a title · ×1
  • <iframe> without a title web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue:43 — An iframe with no title (or an empty one) is announced only as "frame". Add a non-empty title describing its content, or an aria-label.
D14 · License Compliance · Banned license · ×1
  • Banned license: frozendict — `frozendict` 2.4.7 is published on PyPI under `LGPL-3.0`, which this policy bans, and it is in the SHIPPED closure of this repository — so it is installed by everything that depends on this repository, not just by its test environment. A distribution offering SEVERAL licences is a choice and is only charged when every one of them is banned. Replace the package, or record an accepted exception.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×1
  • REDACTED
D8 · Code Coverage · No automated tests · ×1
  • No automated tests — No automated tests — no test code was found in this repository. Untested code is the largest single risk to changing it safely. Start with the code you change most often: add a suite in a framework a runner can collect (pytest or unittest), and run it in CI so the gap cannot reopen.
Serious — 506 finding(s)
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) · ×32
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) chat.py:119 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) chat.py:148 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) chat.py:172 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) chat.py:228 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:89 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:163 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:244 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:254 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:122 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:137 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:301 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:308 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:357 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:380 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:47 — `except` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:409 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:418 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:427 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:734 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:743 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:752 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:1289 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:1298 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:1307 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) REDACTED:1613 — `except Exception` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
  • + 7 more in this group — see findings.md.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×14
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×8
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) REDACTED:339 — REDACTED:339-347 | REDACTED:1219-1227 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) REDACTED:188 — REDACTED:188-196 | REDACTED:390-398 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) REDACTED:157 — REDACTED:157-165 | REDACTED:360-368 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:22 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:22-30 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:41-49 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:48 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:48-56 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:55-63 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:177 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:177-185 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:174-182 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:72 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:72-80 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:129-137 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 231 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:195 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:195-203 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:200-208 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×8
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:226 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:226-233 | REDACTED:113-120 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) REDACTED:220 — REDACTED:220-227 | REDACTED:177-184 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 73 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) REDACTED:160 — REDACTED:160-167 | REDACTED:153-160 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:39 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:39-46 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:57-64 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/wemath.py:50 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/wemath.py:50-57 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/wemath.py:273-280 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:173 — omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:173-180 | omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:250-257 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:173` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:239 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:239-246 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:244-251 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:418 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:418-425 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:423-430 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×8
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:156 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:156-160 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:118-122 — `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:156` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:207 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:207-211 | REDACTED:446-450 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:53 — REDACTED:53-57 | REDACTED:118-123 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) REDACTED:33 — REDACTED:33-37 | REDACTED:42-46 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:33` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:92 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:92-96 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:100-104 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:64 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:64-68 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:70-74 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:228 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:228-232 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:110-114 — `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:207 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:207-211 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:212-216 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (empty catch) · ×8
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:171 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:178 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:186 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) REDACTED:94 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:217 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:225 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:233 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
  • Swallowed exception (empty catch) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:96 — An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×7
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:105 — REDACTED:105-138 | REDACTED:521-554 | REDACTED:980-1013 | REDACTED:1401-1434 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:351 — REDACTED:351-430 | REDACTED:678-755 | REDACTED:1231-1310 | REDACTED:1557-1634 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:434 — REDACTED:434-473 | REDACTED:759-883 | REDACTED:1314-1353 | REDACTED:1638-1760 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:89 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:89-161 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:106-126 | REDACTED:461-534 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:96-139 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:150 — REDACTED:150-203 | REDACTED:1013-1061 | REDACTED:1363-1418 | REDACTED:5-65 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:95 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:95-115 | web_demos/web_demo.py:118-138 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:111-131 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:102-122 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:127 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:127-145 | web_demos/web_demo.py:142-165 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:135-157 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:132-150 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×7
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/__init__.py:86 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/__init__.py:86-91 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/video_concat_dataset.py:42-47 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:165 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:165-170 | REDACTED:114-119 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:171` calls `replace` and `REDACTED:120` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:142 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:142-147 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:157-162 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:20 — eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:20-25 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:103-108 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) REDACTED:52 — REDACTED:52-58 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmgenbench.py:57-62 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py:6 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py:6-11 | eval_mm/vqaeval/eval_utils/cal_metric.py:6-11 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:50 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:50-55 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py:120-125 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) · ×6
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) REDACTED:658 — REDACTED:658-676 | REDACTED:727-745 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:746` calls `replace` and `REDACTED:677` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) REDACTED:304 — REDACTED:304-322 | REDACTED:259-277 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 73 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:303` calls `chr`, `ord` and `REDACTED:258` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:434 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:434-452 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:686-704 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:434` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:36 — eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:36-54 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:127-145 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:156 — eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:156-174 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:268-286 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:156` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:127 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:127-145 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:132-150 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×6
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:271 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:271-277 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:139-145 — `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) REDACTED:349 — REDACTED:349-355 | REDACTED:592-598 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:349` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:118 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:118-124 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:127-133 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:189 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:189-195 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/yorn.py:196-202 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:250 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:250-256 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:255-261 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) web_demos/web_demo.py:169 — web_demos/web_demo.py:169-175 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:161-167 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/web_demo.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 95 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×5
  • FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED — FileTooLong — 1324 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 824 over it, 2.65× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
  • FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED — FileTooLong — 1190 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 690 over it, 2.38× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
  • FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED — FileTooLong — 679 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 179 over it, 1.36× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
  • FileTooLong: vlm/minicpm_v.py eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py — FileTooLong — 611 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 111 over it, 1.22× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
  • FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED — FileTooLong — 523 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 23 over it, 1.05× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) · ×5
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py:232 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py:232-242 | eval_mm/vqaeval/eval_utils/vqa_evaluate.py:309-319 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py:244` calls `str` and `eval_mm/vqaeval/eval_utils/vqa_evaluate.py:320` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:123 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:123-133 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:152-162 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:139 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:139-149 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:176-186 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 70 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:139` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:187` calls `pop` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:151` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:413 — omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:413-423 | omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:430-440 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/model_server.py:218 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/model_server.py:218-228 | web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/model_server.py:235-245 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×5
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/__init__.py:106 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/__init__.py:106-115 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/video_concat_dataset.py:62-71 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:212 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:212-221 | REDACTED:451-460 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:200 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:200-209 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:221-230 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py:156 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py:156-165 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py:167-176 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) web_demos/web_demo.py:218 — web_demos/web_demo.py:218-227 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:210-219 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/web_demo.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 95 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×4
  • TodoComment eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:202 — # TODO: make efficient — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `# REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment finetune/trainer.py:160 — # TODO: this needs to be fixed and made cleaner later. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `# REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:349 — # TODO could be removed for generate_vllm() — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `# REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment omnilmm/train/train_utils.py:87 — # TODO: this automatically add '\n' to the end — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `# REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D17 · Explicit Debt · HackComment · ×4
  • HackComment omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:67 — # HACK: for FSDP — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
  • HackComment omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:110 — # HACK: for FSDP — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
  • HackComment omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:143 — # HACK: replace back original embeddings for LLaVA pretraining — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
  • HackComment omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:198 — # HACK: replace back original embeddings for LLaVA pretraining — a workaround marked in source: record what it is compensating for and what would allow its removal (the upstream fix, the API it is waiting on, the invariant it restores), so the next reader can judge whether it is still needed rather than rediscovering why it is there.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) REDACTED:649 — REDACTED:649-669 | REDACTED:1528-1548 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:649` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:122 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:122-142 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:168-188 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:121` calls `extend` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:167` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:60 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:60-80 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py:130-150 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:57 — eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:57-77 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:148-168 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) REDACTED:13 — REDACTED:13-29 | REDACTED:11-27 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) REDACTED:435 — REDACTED:435-451 | REDACTED:461-477 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:321 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:321-337 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:550-566 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:149 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:149-165 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:154-170 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) REDACTED:254 — REDACTED:254-266 | REDACTED:557-569 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:555` calls `frame_paths_fps` and `REDACTED:252` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) REDACTED:126 — REDACTED:126-138 | REDACTED:106-118 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) REDACTED:215 — REDACTED:215-227 | eval_mm/vqaeval/eval_utils/vqa_evaluate.py:70-82 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) web_demos/web_demo.py:153 — web_demos/web_demo.py:153-165 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:145-157 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/web_demo.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 95 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `web_demos/web_demo.py:153` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) · ×4
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:165 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:165-169 | REDACTED:538-542 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:143-147 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:34 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:34-38 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:52-56 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mvbench.py:84-88 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:13 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:13-17 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:13-17 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:13-17 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) eval_mm/vqaeval/eval.py:62 — eval_mm/vqaeval/eval.py:62-66 | eval_mm/vqaeval/eval.py:70-74 | eval_mm/vqaeval/eval.py:78-82 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function onmessage (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) · ×4
  • Complex function onmessage (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:449 — onmessage has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
  • Complex function onmessage (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:442 — onmessage has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
  • Complex function onmessage (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:367 — onmessage has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
  • Complex function onmessage (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:367 — onmessage has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) REDACTED:792 — REDACTED:792-819 | REDACTED:1671-1698 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:101 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:101-128 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:107-134 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:105` calls `hasattr` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:99` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (28 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:381 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:381-408 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:386-413 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:176 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:176-195 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:246-265 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:152 — omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:152-171 | omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:229-248 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:152` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:310 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:310-329 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:315-334 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mlvu.py:78 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mlvu.py:78-95 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mlvu.py:112-129 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:174 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:174-191 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:179-196 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:218 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:218-235 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:223-240 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) REDACTED:166 — REDACTED:166-179 | REDACTED:369-382 | REDACTED:165-178 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) REDACTED:160 — REDACTED:160-173 | REDACTED:355-368 | REDACTED:547-560 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) REDACTED:186 — REDACTED:186-199 | REDACTED:381-394 | REDACTED:573-586 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:200` calls `dict` and `REDACTED:395` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:170 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:170-182 | REDACTED:543-555 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:148-160 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) REDACTED:240 — REDACTED:240-252 | REDACTED:434-446 | REDACTED:627-639 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:240` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:78 — eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:78-90 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:178-190 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:290-302 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:92 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:92-103 | REDACTED:1348-1359 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_base.py:37-48 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:92` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) REDACTED:194 — REDACTED:194-205 | REDACTED:397-408 | REDACTED:584-595 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:206` calls `dict` and `REDACTED:409` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:131 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:131-142 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:137-148 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:118-129 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) REDACTED:143 — REDACTED:143-153 | REDACTED:269-279 | REDACTED:507-517 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) REDACTED:615 — REDACTED:615-625 | REDACTED:651-661 | REDACTED:672-682 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 3) REDACTED:131 — REDACTED:131-141 | REDACTED:111-121 | REDACTED:113-123 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:128` calls `post_check`, `dict` and `REDACTED:112` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) REDACTED:163 — REDACTED:163-168 | REDACTED:1037-1042 | REDACTED:20-25 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) REDACTED:240 — REDACTED:240-245 | REDACTED:390-395 | REDACTED:633-638 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/logicvista.py:143 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/logicvista.py:143-148 | REDACTED:162-167 | REDACTED:155-160 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 38 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~18 LoC) · ×3
  • Dead file (~18 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ExtraInfo/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
  • Dead file (~18 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/SkipBtn/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
  • Dead file (~18 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/enums/index.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (47 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (47 lines × 2) REDACTED:280 — REDACTED:280-326 | REDACTED:1160-1206 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:280` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (47 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:260 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:260-306 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:265-311 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (40 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (40 lines × 2) REDACTED:434 — REDACTED:434-473 | REDACTED:1314-1353 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (40 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:339 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:339-378 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:568-607 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (35 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (35 lines × 2) REDACTED:596 — REDACTED:596-630 | REDACTED:632-666 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (35 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:379 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:379-413 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:608-642 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (32 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (32 lines × 2) REDACTED:242 — REDACTED:242-273 | REDACTED:1122-1153 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:242` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
  • Duplicated block (32 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:99 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:99-130 | REDACTED:469-500 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:97` calls `isinstance` and `REDACTED:468` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (25 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (25 lines × 2) REDACTED:759 — REDACTED:759-783 | REDACTED:1638-1662 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (25 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:75 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:75-99 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:80-104 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:105` calls `hasattr` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:101` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13–19 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (13–19 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:84 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:84-102 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:50-62 — `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
  • Duplicated block (13–19 lines × 2) REDACTED:150 — REDACTED:150-168 | REDACTED:1030-1042 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 4) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 4) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:125 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:125-141 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:108-124 | REDACTED:495-511 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:103-119 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 4) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:447 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:447-463 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:699-715 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:169-185 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:281-297 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py` and `eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 36 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:447` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py:179 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py:179-195 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py:208-223 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:119 — eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:119-135 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:225-240 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:119` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) REDACTED:626 — REDACTED:626-641 | REDACTED:1505-1520 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) REDACTED:24 — REDACTED:24-39 | REDACTED:62-77 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:151 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:151-164 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:108-121 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:191 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:191-204 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:429-442 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) REDACTED:94 — REDACTED:94-105 | REDACTED:112-123 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) omnilmm/conversation.py:88 — omnilmm/conversation.py:88-99 | omnilmm/conversation.py:118-129 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:72 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:72-81 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:102-112 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:113` calls `extend`, `mean` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:82` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
  • Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:21 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:21-30 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:270-280 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) REDACTED:90 — REDACTED:90-99 | REDACTED:301-310 | REDACTED:450-459 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 3) REDACTED:344 — REDACTED:344-354 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mathverse.py:130-139 | REDACTED:111-120 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made 3 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) REDACTED:436 — REDACTED:436-444 | REDACTED:765-773 | REDACTED:1316-1324 | REDACTED:1644-1652 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 4) REDACTED:798 — REDACTED:798-806 | REDACTED:844-852 | REDACTED:1677-1685 | REDACTED:1721-1729 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:798` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) REDACTED:174 — REDACTED:174-182 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:18-26 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:44-52 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) REDACTED:366 — REDACTED:366-375 | REDACTED:438-447 | REDACTED:465-473 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function stopRecording (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 9) · ×2
  • Complex function stopRecording (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 9) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:368 — stopRecording has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 9; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
  • Complex function stopRecording (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 9) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:361 — stopRecording has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 9; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~16 LoC) · ×2
  • Dead file (~16 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/DelayTips/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
  • Dead file (~16 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/index.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~0 LoC) · ×2
  • Dead file (~0 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/CallHeader/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
  • Dead file (~0 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/Chatbot.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
AC3 · Page structure · Page without a main landmark · ×1
  • Page without a main landmark web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/index.html:2 — No <main> (or role="main") means no "skip to content" target and a weaker landmark map. This document's body is only the mount point <div id="app">, so there is no content here to wrap — render the <main> from the component mounted into it.
AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Focus outline removed in CSS without a · ×1
  • Focus outline removed in CSS without a :focus replacement web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/styles/main.css:29 — `:focus-visible` sets the outline to none/0 and no visible :focus / :focus-visible style for that element replaces it in this stylesheet, so a keyboard user cannot see where focus is. Draw a focus ring (outline, box-shadow or border) under :focus-visible.
AC6 · Visual & motion safety · Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard · ×1
  • Animation without a prefers-reduced-motion guard web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/Voice/index.vue:133 — `.bar` moves (`transition: height 0.1s, background-color 0.1s`) and nothing reads prefers-reduced-motion for it — no @media (prefers-reduced-motion) rule for this element, no reset this project loads — so a motion-sensitive user cannot turn it off (WCAG 2.3.3). Declare it under @media (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference), or neutralise it under reduce.
AC7 · A11y enforcement · Accessibility enforcement below the top rung · ×1
  • Accessibility enforcement below the top rung — No accessibility enforcement found — no a11y linter (eslint-plugin-vuejs-accessibility) and no axe/pa11y/Lighthouse in tests or CI. Start with the linter to catch issues at author time. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 22 markup file(s) this pass actually assessed, the linter configuration checked in beside them, and this repository's test and CI files — matched by name against the accessibility checkers this dimension carries. An audit run outside the repository, a hosted scanner, or a check whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · run.main (cyclomatic 78) · ×1
  • run.main (cyclomatic 78) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/run.py:150 — run.main has cyclomatic complexity 78 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:320 — MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt has cyclomatic complexity 36 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cyclomatic 36) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:549 — MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt has cyclomatic complexity 36 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · inference_video.infer_data (cyclomatic 27) · ×1
  • inference_video.infer_data (cyclomatic 27) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:51 — inference_video.infer_data has cyclomatic complexity 27 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CPMTrainer.prediction_step (cyclomatic 26) · ×1
  • CPMTrainer.prediction_step (cyclomatic 26) finetune/trainer.py:45 — CPMTrainer.prediction_step has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · tools.RUN (cyclomatic 25) · ×1
  • tools.RUN (cyclomatic 25) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py:268 — tools.RUN has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt (cyclomatic 24) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt (cyclomatic 24) REDACTED:240 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt (cyclomatic 24) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt (cyclomatic 24) REDACTED:1120 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · cgbench.post_process (cyclomatic 22) · ×1
  • cgbench.post_process (cyclomatic 22) REDACTED:361 — cgbench.post_process has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · MiniCPM_Llama3_V.build_prompt (cyclomatic 22) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_Llama3_V.build_prompt (cyclomatic 22) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:124 — MiniCPM_Llama3_V.build_prompt has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · OlympiadBench.evaluate (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • OlympiadBench.evaluate (cyclomatic 21) REDACTED:537 — OlympiadBench.evaluate has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ImageYORNDataset.evaluate (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • ImageYORNDataset.evaluate (cyclomatic 21) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_yorn.py:26 — ImageYORNDataset.evaluate has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · dataset.preprocess (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • dataset.preprocess (cyclomatic 21) finetune/dataset.py:321 — dataset.preprocess has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · finetune.train (cyclomatic 21) · ×1
  • finetune.train (cyclomatic 21) finetune/finetune.py:167 — finetune.train has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · OpenAIWrapper.__init__ (cyclomatic 20) · ×1
  • OpenAIWrapper.__init__ (cyclomatic 20) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/gpt.py:36 — OpenAIWrapper.__init__ has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · mp_util.track_progress_rich (cyclomatic 19) · ×1
  • mp_util.track_progress_rich (cyclomatic 19) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/utils/mp_util.py:14 — mp_util.track_progress_rich has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) REDACTED:349 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) REDACTED:676 — CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) REDACTED:1229 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames (cyclomatic 18) REDACTED:1555 — CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · common.summary_multi_exp (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • common.summary_multi_exp (cyclomatic 18) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/common.py:139 — common.summary_multi_exp has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · file.ls (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • file.ls (cyclomatic 18) REDACTED:228 — file.ls has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · tools.cli (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • tools.cli (cyclomatic 18) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py:391 — tools.cli has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · train_utils.omni_preprocess (cyclomatic 18) · ×1
  • train_utils.omni_preprocess (cyclomatic 18) omnilmm/train/train_utils.py:50 — train_utils.omni_preprocess has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · DUDE.dump_image (cyclomatic 17) · ×1
  • DUDE.dump_image (cyclomatic 17) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:88 — DUDE.dump_image has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · cgbench.get_dimention_rating_mcq_grouding (cyclomatic 17) · ×1
  • cgbench.get_dimention_rating_mcq_grouding (cyclomatic 17) REDACTED:128 — cgbench.get_dimention_rating_mcq_grouding has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · cgbench.unzip_hf_zip (cyclomatic 17) · ×1
  • cgbench.unzip_hf_zip (cyclomatic 17) REDACTED:585 — cgbench.unzip_hf_zip has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · eval.main (cyclomatic 17) · ×1
  • eval.main (cyclomatic 17) eval_mm/vqaeval/eval.py:41 — eval.main has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CMMMU.evaluate (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • CMMMU.evaluate (cyclomatic 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:224 — CMMMU.evaluate has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · MMNIAH.build_prompt (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • MMNIAH.build_prompt (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:1420 — MMNIAH.build_prompt has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · MMLongBench.dump_image (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • MMLongBench.dump_image (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:460 — MMLongBench.dump_image has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · mmlongbench.eval_score (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • mmlongbench.eval_score (cyclomatic 16) REDACTED:297 — mmlongbench.eval_score has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · AutoScoringJudge.expression_equal (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • AutoScoringJudge.expression_equal (cyclomatic 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:207 — AutoScoringJudge.expression_equal has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · MathJudger.expression_equal (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • MathJudger.expression_equal (cyclomatic 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:260 — MathJudger.expression_equal has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · inference.infer_data_api (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • inference.infer_data_api (cyclomatic 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:21 — inference.infer_data_api has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · run.main (cognitive 199) · ×1
  • run.main (cognitive 199) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/run.py:150 — run.main has cognitive complexity 199 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 52 (165 pts), loops 6 (18 pts), boolean chains 10, error handling 1 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 129). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:320 — MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 79 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 29 (61 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 2 (6 pts), ternaries 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 40). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt (cognitive 79) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:549 — MiniCPM_o_2_6.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 79 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 29 (61 pts), boolean chains 6, loops 2 (6 pts), ternaries 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 40). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MiniCPM_V_2_6.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · cgbench.post_process (cognitive 62) · ×1
  • cgbench.post_process (cognitive 62) REDACTED:361 — cgbench.post_process has cognitive complexity 62 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (48 pts), ternaries 2 (9 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 41). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · dataset.preprocess (cognitive 57) · ×1
  • dataset.preprocess (cognitive 57) finetune/dataset.py:321 — dataset.preprocess has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (39 pts), loops 6 (17 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 31). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OlympiadBench.evaluate (cognitive 55) · ×1
  • OlympiadBench.evaluate (cognitive 55) REDACTED:537 — OlympiadBench.evaluate has cognitive complexity 55 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (27 pts), loops 9 (22 pts), ternaries 1 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 34). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CPMTrainer.prediction_step (cognitive 52) · ×1
  • CPMTrainer.prediction_step (cognitive 52) finetune/trainer.py:45 — CPMTrainer.prediction_step has cognitive complexity 52 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (46 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 2 (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt (cognitive 51) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt (cognitive 51) REDACTED:240 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 51 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (46 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 25). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt (cognitive 51) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt (cognitive 51) REDACTED:1120 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 51 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (46 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 25). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.build_prompt) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · tools.RUN (cognitive 51) · ×1
  • tools.RUN (cognitive 51) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py:268 — tools.RUN has cognitive complexity 51 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (27 pts), ternaries 5 (19 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 30). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OmniLMMModel.forward (cognitive 49) · ×1
  • OmniLMMModel.forward (cognitive 49) omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:184 — OmniLMMModel.forward has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (34 pts), loops 3 (12 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 32). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · inference_video.infer_data (cognitive 47) · ×1
  • inference_video.infer_data (cognitive 47) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:51 — inference_video.infer_data has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 18 (37 pts), ternaries 4, boolean chains 3, loops 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CMMMU.evaluate (cognitive 45) · ×1
  • CMMMU.evaluate (cognitive 45) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:224 — CMMMU.evaluate has cognitive complexity 45 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (29 pts), loops 4 (14 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 31). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · common.summary_multi_exp (cognitive 41) · ×1
  • common.summary_multi_exp (cognitive 41) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/common.py:139 — common.summary_multi_exp has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (18 pts), loops 7 (14 pts), ternaries 3 (8 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 24). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · train_utils.omni_preprocess (cognitive 41) · ×1
  • train_utils.omni_preprocess (cognitive 41) omnilmm/train/train_utils.py:50 — train_utils.omni_preprocess has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (20 pts), ternaries 4 (12 pts), loops 5 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 23). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · file.ls (cognitive 39) · ×1
  • file.ls (cognitive 39) REDACTED:228 — file.ls has cognitive complexity 39 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (32 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.get_subtitles (cognitive 35) · ×1
  • CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.get_subtitles (cognitive 35) REDACTED:519 — CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.get_subtitles has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (25 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_OpenEnded.get_subtitles) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_OpenEnded.get_subtitles (cognitive 35) · ×1
  • CGBench_OpenEnded.get_subtitles (cognitive 35) REDACTED:1399 — CGBench_OpenEnded.get_subtitles has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (25 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.get_subtitles) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.get_subtitles (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.get_subtitles (cognitive 34) REDACTED:103 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.get_subtitles has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (24 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.get_subtitles) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) REDACTED:349 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), error handling 3 (11 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) REDACTED:676 — CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), error handling 3 (11 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.get_subtitles (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.get_subtitles (cognitive 34) REDACTED:978 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.get_subtitles has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (24 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.get_subtitles) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) REDACTED:1229 — CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), error handling 3 (11 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames (cognitive 34) REDACTED:1555 — CGBench_OpenEnded.save_video_frames has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), error handling 3 (11 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: 3 other methods here (CGBench_MCQ_Grounding_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_OpenEnded_Mini.save_video_frames, CGBench_MCQ_Grounding.save_video_frames) have the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written 4 times rather than 4 independent problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other 3 exactly as they are. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears all 4 is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DUDE.dump_image (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • DUDE.dump_image (cognitive 34) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:88 — DUDE.dump_image has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (24 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 1, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ImageYORNDataset.evaluate (cognitive 34) · ×1
  • ImageYORNDataset.evaluate (cognitive 34) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_yorn.py:26 — ImageYORNDataset.evaluate has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (22 pts), loops 2 (7 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QSpatial.evaluate (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • QSpatial.evaluate (cognitive 33) REDACTED:1205 — QSpatial.evaluate has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), error handling 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 18). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MLVU_MCQ.evaluate (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • MLVU_MCQ.evaluate (cognitive 33) REDACTED:210 — MLVU_MCQ.evaluate has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (23 pts), loops 3 (8 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MMLongBench.dump_image (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • MMLongBench.dump_image (cognitive 33) REDACTED:460 — MMLongBench.dump_image has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (23 pts), loops 4 (8 pts), boolean chains 1, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MVBench.evaluate (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • MVBench.evaluate (cognitive 33) REDACTED:358 — MVBench.evaluate has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (23 pts), loops 3 (8 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MVBench_MP4.evaluate) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MVBench_MP4.evaluate (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • MVBench_MP4.evaluate (cognitive 33) REDACTED:601 — MVBench_MP4.evaluate has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (23 pts), loops 3 (8 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MVBench.evaluate) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · multiple_choice.report_acc_MMT (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • multiple_choice.report_acc_MMT (cognitive 33) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:94 — multiple_choice.report_acc_MMT has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 8 (24 pts), if/else 4 (5 pts), ternaries 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 20). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · mp_util.track_progress_rich (cognitive 33) · ×1
  • mp_util.track_progress_rich (cognitive 33) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/utils/mp_util.py:14 — mp_util.track_progress_rich has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (24 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · finetune.train (cognitive 30) · ×1
  • finetune.train (cognitive 30) finetune/finetune.py:167 — finetune.train has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (21 pts), ternaries 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OmniLMMModel.get_vllm_embedding (cognitive 30) · ×1
  • OmniLMMModel.get_vllm_embedding (cognitive 30) omnilmm/model/omnilmm.py:123 — OmniLMMModel.get_vllm_embedding has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (23 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OlympiadBench.build_prompt (cognitive 29) · ×1
  • OlympiadBench.build_prompt (cognitive 29) REDACTED:462 — OlympiadBench.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (24 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenAIWrapper.__init__ (cognitive 28) · ×1
  • OpenAIWrapper.__init__ (cognitive 28) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/gpt.py:36 — OpenAIWrapper.__init__ has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (25 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LongVideoBench.prepare_dataset (cognitive 27) · ×1
  • LongVideoBench.prepare_dataset (cognitive 27) REDACTED:106 — LongVideoBench.prepare_dataset has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (20 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · mmlongbench.eval_score (cognitive 27) · ×1
  • mmlongbench.eval_score (cognitive 27) REDACTED:297 — mmlongbench.eval_score has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (20 pts), error handling 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AutoScoringJudge.expression_equal (cognitive 27) · ×1
  • AutoScoringJudge.expression_equal (cognitive 27) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:207 — AutoScoringJudge.expression_equal has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), boolean chains 6, error handling 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MathJudger.expression_equal (cognitive 27) · ×1
  • MathJudger.expression_equal (cognitive 27) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:260 — MathJudger.expression_equal has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), boolean chains 6, error handling 2 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MathVerse.evaluate (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • MathVerse.evaluate (cognitive 26) REDACTED:284 — MathVerse.evaluate has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (18 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · SlideVQA.dump_image (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • SlideVQA.dump_image (cognitive 26) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:95 — SlideVQA.dump_image has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (20 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · multiple_choice.mcq_circular_eval (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • multiple_choice.mcq_circular_eval (cognitive 26) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:400 — multiple_choice.mcq_circular_eval has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (16 pts), loops 5 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MiniCPM_Llama3_V.build_prompt (cognitive 26) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_Llama3_V.build_prompt (cognitive 26) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:124 — MiniCPM_Llama3_V.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (17 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · longvideobench.insert_subtitles_into_frames (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • longvideobench.insert_subtitles_into_frames (cognitive 25) REDACTED:26 — longvideobench.insert_subtitles_into_frames has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), loops 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · kie_evaluator.normalize_dict (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • kie_evaluator.normalize_dict (cognitive 25) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/kie_evaluator.py:92 — kie_evaluator.normalize_dict has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (19 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · cgbench.get_dimention_rating_mcq_grouding (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • cgbench.get_dimention_rating_mcq_grouding (cognitive 25) REDACTED:128 — cgbench.get_dimention_rating_mcq_grouding has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 13 (16 pts), ternaries 3 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · cgbench.post_process_eval_open (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • cgbench.post_process_eval_open (cognitive 25) REDACTED:459 — cgbench.post_process_eval_open has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (20 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · multiple_choice.get_dimension_rating (cognitive 25) · ×1
  • multiple_choice.get_dimension_rating (cognitive 25) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:497 — multiple_choice.get_dimension_rating has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), loops 6 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MMNIAH.build_prompt (cognitive 24) · ×1
  • MMNIAH.build_prompt (cognitive 24) REDACTED:1420 — MMNIAH.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 9 (14 pts), if/else 8 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseAPI.generate (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • BaseAPI.generate (cognitive 23) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:216 — BaseAPI.generate has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), error handling 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · dynamath.parse_answer (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • dynamath.parse_answer (cognitive 23) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:37 — dynamath.parse_answer has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts), loops 1 (4 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · inference.infer_data_job (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • inference.infer_data_job (cognitive 23) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:146 — inference.infer_data_job has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), loops 3 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · dataset.conversation_to_ids_qwen2 (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • dataset.conversation_to_ids_qwen2 (cognitive 23) finetune/dataset.py:272 — dataset.conversation_to_ids_qwen2 has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · dataset.slice_image (cognitive 23) · ×1
  • dataset.slice_image (cognitive 23) finetune/dataset.py:438 — dataset.slice_image has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), loops 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseAPI.chat (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • BaseAPI.chat (cognitive 22) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:155 — BaseAPI.chat has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), error handling 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · VideoMME.build_prompt (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • VideoMME.build_prompt (cognitive 22) REDACTED:186 — VideoMME.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · inference.infer_data (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • inference.infer_data (cognitive 22) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:71 — inference.infer_data has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), ternaries 2, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseModel.message_to_promptvideo_withrole (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • BaseModel.message_to_promptvideo_withrole (cognitive 22) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:169 — BaseModel.message_to_promptvideo_withrole has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (18 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Conversation.get_prompt (cognitive 22) · ×1
  • Conversation.get_prompt (cognitive 22) omnilmm/conversation.py:26 — Conversation.get_prompt has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · mmlongbench.frame2img (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • mmlongbench.frame2img (cognitive 21) REDACTED:207 — mmlongbench.frame2img has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), loops 5 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · inference.infer_data_api (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • inference.infer_data_api (cognitive 21) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:21 — inference.infer_data_api has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (17 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · inference_mt.infer_data (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • inference_mt.infer_data (cognitive 21) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:77 — inference_mt.infer_data has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Conversation.get_images (cognitive 21) · ×1
  • Conversation.get_images (cognitive 21) omnilmm/conversation.py:54 — Conversation.get_images has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (20 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseAPI.message_to_promptimg (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • BaseAPI.message_to_promptimg (cognitive 20) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:267 — BaseAPI.message_to_promptimg has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (18 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · cmmmu.get_multi_choice_prediction (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • cmmmu.get_multi_choice_prediction (cognitive 20) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:10 — cmmmu.get_multi_choice_prediction has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (10 pts), loops 5 (8 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LogicVista.evaluate (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • LogicVista.evaluate (cognitive 20) REDACTED:723 — LogicVista.evaluate has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · kie_evaluator.cal_f1_all (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • kie_evaluator.cal_f1_all (cognitive 20) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/kie_evaluator.py:122 — kie_evaluator.cal_f1_all has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (14 pts), loops 4 (6 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · mmniah.is_correct (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • mmniah.is_correct (cognitive 20) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py:249 — mmniah.is_correct has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (16 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · videomme.get_dimension_rating (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • videomme.get_dimension_rating (cognitive 20) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py:72 — videomme.get_dimension_rating has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), loops 6 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · eval.main (cognitive 20) · ×1
  • eval.main (cognitive 20) eval_mm/vqaeval/eval.py:41 — eval.main has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (15 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · GMAIMMBenchDataset.load_data (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • GMAIMMBenchDataset.load_data (cognitive 19) REDACTED:441 — GMAIMMBenchDataset.load_data has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ImageMTDataset.build_prompt (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • ImageMTDataset.build_prompt (cognitive 19) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_mt.py:11 — ImageMTDataset.build_prompt has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (15 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ImageVQADataset.evaluate (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • ImageVQADataset.evaluate (cognitive 19) REDACTED:48 — ImageVQADataset.evaluate has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), loops 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · LongVideoBench.evaluate (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • LongVideoBench.evaluate (cognitive 19) REDACTED:271 — LongVideoBench.evaluate has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · mmlongbench.concat_images (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • mmlongbench.concat_images (cognitive 19) REDACTED:264 — mmlongbench.concat_images has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (10 pts), loops 4 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · mathvista.MathVista_acc (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • mathvista.MathVista_acc (cognitive 19) REDACTED:124 — mathvista.MathVista_acc has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 5 (10 pts), if/else 3 (7 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ocrbench.OCRBench_eval (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • ocrbench.OCRBench_eval (cognitive 19) REDACTED:4 — ocrbench.OCRBench_eval has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), loops 4 (8 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · VideoMME.evaluate (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • VideoMME.evaluate (cognitive 19) REDACTED:227 — VideoMME.evaluate has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WildVision.evaluate (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • WildVision.evaluate (cognitive 19) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:142 — WildVision.evaluate has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · tools.cli (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • tools.cli (cognitive 19) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py:391 — tools.cli has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (12 pts), loops 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · dataset.conversation_to_ids (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • dataset.conversation_to_ids (cognitive 19) finetune/dataset.py:126 — dataset.conversation_to_ids has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (17 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · dynamath.DynaMath_auxeval (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • dynamath.DynaMath_auxeval (cognitive 18) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:63 — dynamath.DynaMath_auxeval has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (17 pts), error handling 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OCRBench.evaluate (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • OCRBench.evaluate (cognitive 18) REDACTED:149 — OCRBench.evaluate has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (11 pts), loops 3 (7 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WeMath.evaluate (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • WeMath.evaluate (cognitive 18) REDACTED:653 — WeMath.evaluate has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (9 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MMNIAH.prepare_tsv (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • MMNIAH.prepare_tsv (cognitive 18) REDACTED:1323 — MMNIAH.prepare_tsv has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · file.MMBenchOfficialServer (cognitive 18) · ×1
  • file.MMBenchOfficialServer (cognitive 18) REDACTED:91 — file.MMBenchOfficialServer has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (14 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseAPI.preproc_content (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • BaseAPI.preproc_content (cognitive 17) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:104 — BaseAPI.preproc_content has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Dynamath.evaluate (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • Dynamath.evaluate (cognitive 17) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:164 — Dynamath.evaluate has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (8 pts), loops 6 (8 pts), ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ImageMCQDataset.evaluate (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • ImageMCQDataset.evaluate (cognitive 17) REDACTED:201 — ImageMCQDataset.evaluate has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (12 pts), ternaries 2 (3 pts), loops 2 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MMBenchVideo.robust_json_load (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • MMBenchVideo.robust_json_load (cognitive 17) REDACTED:154 — MMBenchVideo.robust_json_load has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (11 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · multiple_choice.extract_answer_from_item (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • multiple_choice.extract_answer_from_item (cognitive 17) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:262 — multiple_choice.extract_answer_from_item has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (13 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · tempcompass.eval_rule_caption_matching (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • tempcompass.eval_rule_caption_matching (cognitive 17) REDACTED:69 — tempcompass.eval_rule_caption_matching has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (8 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 3, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · inference_video.infer_data_job_video (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • inference_video.infer_data_job_video (cognitive 17) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:133 — inference_video.infer_data_job_video has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (9 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseModel.preproc_content (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • BaseModel.preproc_content (cognitive 17) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:64 — BaseModel.preproc_content has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MiniCPMV2_6.chat (cognitive 17) · ×1
  • MiniCPMV2_6.chat (cognitive 17) chat.py:223 — MiniCPMV2_6.chat has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MMDUDataset.calculat_metric (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • MMDUDataset.calculat_metric (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_mt.py:61 — MMDUDataset.calculat_metric has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 3 (6 pts), error handling 1 (5 pts), if/else 1 (4 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AutoScoringJudge.is_equal (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • AutoScoringJudge.is_equal (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:151 — AutoScoringJudge.is_equal has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (7 pts), error handling 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · cgbench.unzip_hf_zip (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • cgbench.unzip_hf_zip (cognitive 16) REDACTED:585 — cgbench.unzip_hf_zip has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5, loops 5, boolean chains 3, error handling 3. To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MathJudger.is_equal (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • MathJudger.is_equal (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:198 — MathJudger.is_equal has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (7 pts), error handling 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · olympiadbench.get_answer_type_text (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • olympiadbench.get_answer_type_text (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:40 — olympiadbench.get_answer_type_text has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (15 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · VideoBaseDataset.save_video_frames (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • VideoBaseDataset.save_video_frames (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/video_base.py:68 — VideoBaseDataset.save_video_frames has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · vlm.circular_pred (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • vlm.circular_pred (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/smp/vlm.py:149 — vlm.circular_pred has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (13 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · matching_util.can_infer_option (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • matching_util.can_infer_option (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/utils/matching_util.py:7 — matching_util.can_infer_option has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (10 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · BaseModel.message_to_promptvideo (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • BaseModel.message_to_promptvideo (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:155 — BaseModel.message_to_promptvideo has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MiniCPM_V_2_6.generate_inner (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_V_2_6.generate_inner (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:419 — MiniCPM_V_2_6.generate_inner has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MiniCPM_o_2_6.generate_inner) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · MiniCPM_o_2_6.generate_inner (cognitive 16) · ×1
  • MiniCPM_o_2_6.generate_inner (cognitive 16) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:670 — MiniCPM_o_2_6.generate_inner has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (MiniCPM_V_2_6.generate_inner) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×1
  • REDACTED
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 32 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 32 shared lines) REDACTED:272 — REDACTED:272-328 | REDACTED:211-272 | REDACTED:360-423 | REDACTED:603-666 | REDACTED:228-283 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 32 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 28 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 28 shared lines) REDACTED:202 — REDACTED:202-283 | REDACTED:502-553 | REDACTED:770-824 | REDACTED:654-713 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:43-109 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 28 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 21 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 21 shared lines) REDACTED:216 — REDACTED:216-260 | REDACTED:285-365 | REDACTED:382-429 | REDACTED:724-788 | REDACTED:1207-1306 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 21 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 19 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member family (5 members, 19 shared lines) REDACTED:216 — REDACTED:216-260 | REDACTED:285-365 | REDACTED:382-429 | REDACTED:840-883 | REDACTED:1207-1306 — These 5 members are variants of one another: a block of 19 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 42 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 42 shared lines) REDACTED:142 — REDACTED:142-238 | REDACTED:558-622 | REDACTED:1017-1118 | REDACTED:1438-1501 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 42 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 24 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 24 shared lines) REDACTED:242 — REDACTED:242-347 | REDACTED:626-669 | REDACTED:1122-1227 | REDACTED:1505-1548 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 24 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 13 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member family (4 members, 13 shared lines) REDACTED:166 — REDACTED:166-199 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:125-183 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:321-417 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:550-646 — These 4 members are variants of one another: a block of 13 lines reported below appears in every one of them, and the pairwise near-duplicate rows they would otherwise produce are collapsed into this row. Read them as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (65 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member pair (65 shared lines) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:72 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:72-142 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:78-148 — These two members are variants of one another: 65 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (24 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member pair (24 shared lines) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:105 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:105-174 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:144-222 — These two members are variants of one another: 24 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (23 shared lines) · ×1
  • Near-duplicate member pair (23 shared lines) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:22 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:22-68 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:41-74 — These two members are variants of one another: 23 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication · Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) · ×1
  • Edited copy of a member (20 corresponding lines) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py:179 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py:179-204 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/doc_parsing_evaluator.py:207-232 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 20 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (8 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:200 — REDACTED:200-227 | REDACTED:156-185 | REDACTED:359-388 | REDACTED:152-179 | REDACTED:347-374 | REDACTED:539-566 | REDACTED:549-574 | REDACTED:157-184 — These 8 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 8 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 8 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1
  • Members sharing a duplicated core (5 members, 50+ identical tokens) REDACTED:343 — REDACTED:343-361 | REDACTED:125-141 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mathverse.py:129-142 | REDACTED:105-121 | REDACTED:109-123 — These 5 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 5 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 5 times.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (78–80 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (78–80 lines × 4) REDACTED:351 — REDACTED:351-430 | REDACTED:678-755 | REDACTED:1231-1310 | REDACTED:1557-1634 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (61 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (61 lines × 2) REDACTED:823 — REDACTED:823-883 | REDACTED:1700-1760 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (60 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (60 lines × 2) REDACTED:175 — REDACTED:175-234 | REDACTED:1055-1114 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (53–55 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (53–55 lines × 3) REDACTED:77 — REDACTED:77-130 | REDACTED:271-325 | REDACTED:465-517 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (46–54 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (46–54 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:210 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:210-255 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:269-322 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 231 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (43 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (43 lines × 2) REDACTED:83 — REDACTED:83-125 | REDACTED:294-336 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (36–41 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (36–41 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:320 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:320-355 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:405-445 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 231 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:320` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:357` calls `replace`, `strip` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:446` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (37–38 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (37–38 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:153 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:153-189 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:199-236 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 231 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (34 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (34 lines × 4) REDACTED:105 — REDACTED:105-138 | REDACTED:521-554 | REDACTED:980-1013 | REDACTED:1401-1434 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (33–34 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (33–34 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:105 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:105-137 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:155-188 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 231 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (31–34 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (31–34 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:286 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:286-316 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:367-400 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 231 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (31–32 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (31–32 lines × 2) REDACTED:164 — REDACTED:164-194 | REDACTED:21-52 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (26–32 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (26–32 lines × 2) REDACTED:1016 — REDACTED:1016-1041 | REDACTED:1366-1397 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (30–31 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (30–31 lines × 2) REDACTED:588 — REDACTED:588-618 | REDACTED:1468-1497 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (27–28 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (27–28 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:105 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:105-131 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:65-92 — `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (3–27 lines × 12) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (3–27 lines × 12) REDACTED:219 — REDACTED:219-221 | REDACTED:291-293 | REDACTED:388-390 | REDACTED:844-846 | REDACTED:1213-1215 | REDACTED:120-124 | REDACTED:419-421 | REDACTED:205-231 | REDACTED:399-425 | REDACTED:592-618 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:108-110 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:147-149 — there are 12 copies across 6 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 12 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:221` calls `replace` and `REDACTED:846` does not — after which the two agree again for 5 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (27 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (27 lines × 2) REDACTED:75 — REDACTED:75-101 | REDACTED:64-90 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (23 lines × 4) REDACTED:220 — REDACTED:220-242 | REDACTED:505-527 | REDACTED:775-797 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:56-78 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (2–23 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (2–23 lines × 4) REDACTED:249 — REDACTED:249-271 | REDACTED:543-544 | REDACTED:815-816 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:85-107 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20–22 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (20–22 lines × 5) REDACTED:113 — REDACTED:113-132 | REDACTED:324-343 | REDACTED:117-137 | REDACTED:311-332 | REDACTED:505-524 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21–22 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (21–22 lines × 2) REDACTED:213 — REDACTED:213-234 | REDACTED:251-271 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:213` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (4–21 lines × 6) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (4–21 lines × 6) REDACTED:731 — REDACTED:731-734 | REDACTED:282-302 | REDACTED:218-238 | REDACTED:368-388 | REDACTED:611-631 | REDACTED:238-258 — there are 6 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:303` calls `chr`, `ord` and `REDACTED:259` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20–21 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (20–21 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:134 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:134-153 | REDACTED:504-524 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:112-131 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:134` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (21 lines × 3) REDACTED:247 — REDACTED:247-267 | REDACTED:397-417 | REDACTED:640-660 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (4–21 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (4–21 lines × 4) REDACTED:153 — REDACTED:153-173 | REDACTED:583-586 | REDACTED:1033-1053 | REDACTED:1463-1466 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17–21 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (17–21 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:260 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:260-276 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:333-353 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 7 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 231 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18–20 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (18–20 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:59 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:59-78 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:472-489 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py:129-148 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py:491` calls `lower` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:79` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14–20 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14–20 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:163 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:163-176 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py:158-171 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py:150-169 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 113 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15–19 lines × 6) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (15–19 lines × 6) REDACTED:114 — REDACTED:114-130 | REDACTED:325-341 | REDACTED:474-488 | REDACTED:118-135 | REDACTED:312-330 | REDACTED:506-522 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17–19 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (17–19 lines × 4) REDACTED:145 — REDACTED:145-163 | REDACTED:561-579 | REDACTED:1441-1459 | REDACTED:65-81 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:183 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:183-200 | REDACTED:556-573 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:161-178 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 3) REDACTED:183 — REDACTED:183-198 | REDACTED:225-240 | REDACTED:262-277 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 4) REDACTED:224 — REDACTED:224-238 | REDACTED:608-622 | REDACTED:1104-1118 | REDACTED:1488-1501 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:222` calls `concat` and `REDACTED:606` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:85 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:85-99 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_base.py:30-44 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 2) REDACTED:166 — REDACTED:166-180 | REDACTED:368-381 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12–14 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12–14 lines × 5) REDACTED:148 — REDACTED:148-161 | REDACTED:564-577 | REDACTED:1444-1457 | REDACTED:72-83 | REDACTED:68-79 — there are 5 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:65` calls `exists` and `REDACTED:71` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 4) REDACTED:152 — REDACTED:152-165 | REDACTED:568-581 | REDACTED:1032-1045 | REDACTED:1448-1461 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12–14 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12–14 lines × 2) REDACTED:89 — REDACTED:89-100 | REDACTED:131-144 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:89` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10–14 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (10–14 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:200 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:200-209 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:68-81 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py` and `eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 36 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:200` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 6) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 6) REDACTED:224 — REDACTED:224-236 | REDACTED:509-521 | REDACTED:779-791 | REDACTED:661-673 | REDACTED:730-742 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:60-72 — there are 6 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 6 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:746` calls `replace` and `REDACTED:677` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 4) REDACTED:271 — REDACTED:271-283 | REDACTED:640-652 | REDACTED:1151-1163 | REDACTED:1519-1531 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:23 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:23-34 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py:75-87 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/videomme.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 60 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 5) REDACTED:142 — REDACTED:142-153 | REDACTED:558-569 | REDACTED:1017-1028 | REDACTED:1438-1449 | REDACTED:62-73 — there are 5 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9–12 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9–12 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:118 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:118-129 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:158-166 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 70 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6–11 lines × 9) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6–11 lines × 9) REDACTED:226 — REDACTED:226-231 | REDACTED:297-302 | REDACTED:331-336 | REDACTED:395-400 | REDACTED:751-756 | REDACTED:849-855 | REDACTED:1219-1225 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:120-130 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:160-167 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 70 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:225` calls `load` and `REDACTED:1218` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 5) REDACTED:316 — REDACTED:316-326 | REDACTED:261-271 | REDACTED:411-421 | REDACTED:654-664 | REDACTED:271-281 — there are 5 copies across 4 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 4) REDACTED:325 — REDACTED:325-335 | REDACTED:655-665 | REDACTED:1205-1215 | REDACTED:1534-1544 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:337` calls `eval`, `chr`, `ord` and `REDACTED:667` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:196 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:196-205 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:433-443 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:685-695 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:196` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 13) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 13) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:177 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:177-185 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_mt.py:100-109 | REDACTED:228-236 | REDACTED:299-307 | REDACTED:333-341 | REDACTED:397-405 | REDACTED:753-761 | REDACTED:1222-1230 | REDACTED:550-558 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:155-163 | REDACTED:226-234 | REDACTED:420-428 | REDACTED:613-621 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:227` calls `working` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:176` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 7) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 7) REDACTED:242 — REDACTED:242-251 | REDACTED:313-322 | REDACTED:347-356 | REDACTED:411-420 | REDACTED:767-775 | REDACTED:864-873 | REDACTED:1236-1245 — all 7 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:242` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 6) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 6) REDACTED:271 — REDACTED:271-280 | REDACTED:303-312 | REDACTED:640-649 | REDACTED:1151-1160 | REDACTED:1183-1192 | REDACTED:1519-1528 — all 6 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (10 lines × 5) REDACTED:238 — REDACTED:238-247 | REDACTED:523-532 | REDACTED:793-802 | REDACTED:681-690 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:74-83 — there are 5 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 3) REDACTED:830 — REDACTED:830-838 | REDACTED:986-995 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:115-123 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from all 3 call sites, so a change lands once. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. Note first that the copies are not typed on the same thing: `LOCALIZE` names `..tools` in one and `vlmeval.tools` in another — different types that share a simple name, which is why the text matched. A single extracted unit cannot be given a parameter type that fits both, so unifying those types (or introducing a shared abstraction over them) is the step that has to come BEFORE the extraction above; if they are deliberately separate, the duplication is the price of that separation and the honest resolution is to record the decision rather than to extract.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 2) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:265 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:265-272 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:481-490 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:481` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 5) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:132 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:132-140 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:330-338 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:371-379 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:559-567 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:600-608 — all 5 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7–9 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7–9 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:157 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:157-165 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:83-89 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py:114-122 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/wildvision.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 70 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:155` calls `toliststr` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/vl_rewardbench.py:82` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (4–9 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (4–9 lines × 3) REDACTED:184 — REDACTED:184-192 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:28-36 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:141-144 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 14) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 14) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:180 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:180-186 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_mt.py:103-110 | REDACTED:231-237 | REDACTED:302-308 | REDACTED:336-342 | REDACTED:400-406 | REDACTED:756-762 | REDACTED:1225-1231 | REDACTED:433-439 | REDACTED:553-559 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py:158-164 | REDACTED:229-235 | REDACTED:423-429 | REDACTED:616-622 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 124 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 8) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 8) REDACTED:175 — REDACTED:175-182 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:19-26 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:45-52 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:133-140 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:331-338 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:372-379 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:560-567 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:601-608 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 9 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 110 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 7) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 7) REDACTED:201 — REDACTED:201-208 | REDACTED:159-166 | REDACTED:362-369 | REDACTED:153-160 | REDACTED:348-355 | REDACTED:540-547 | REDACTED:158-165 — there are 7 copies across 4 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 7 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 6) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 6) REDACTED:286 — REDACTED:286-293 | REDACTED:325-332 | REDACTED:655-662 | REDACTED:1166-1173 | REDACTED:1205-1212 | REDACTED:1534-1541 — all 6 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6–8 lines × 6) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6–8 lines × 6) REDACTED:178 — REDACTED:178-185 | REDACTED:381-388 | REDACTED:172-179 | REDACTED:367-374 | REDACTED:559-566 | REDACTED:567-572 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 8 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 104 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) REDACTED:86 — REDACTED:86-93 | REDACTED:297-304 | REDACTED:84-91 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 4) REDACTED:192 — REDACTED:192-198 | REDACTED:395-401 | REDACTED:339-345 | REDACTED:582-588 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `REDACTED:338` calls `ValueError` and `REDACTED:191` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:175 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:175-181 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:408-414 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:637-643 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 2) REDACTED:534 — REDACTED:534-540 | REDACTED:692-697 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 7) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 7) REDACTED:210 — REDACTED:210-215 | REDACTED:168-173 | REDACTED:371-376 | REDACTED:162-167 | REDACTED:357-362 | REDACTED:549-554 | REDACTED:167-172 — there are 7 copies across 4 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 7 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `REDACTED:210` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 5) REDACTED:201 — REDACTED:201-206 | REDACTED:348-353 | REDACTED:591-596 | REDACTED:195-200 | REDACTED:582-587 — before extracting anything, compare `REDACTED` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 11 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 132 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:354` calls `dict` and `REDACTED:207` does not — after which the two agree again for 4 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 10) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 10) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:336 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:336-340 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:157-161 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:162-166 | REDACTED:193-197 | REDACTED:395-399 | REDACTED:707-711 | REDACTED:869-873 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:178-182 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:411-415 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:640-644 — there are 10 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 10 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 8) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 8) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:335 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:335-339 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dynamath.py:156-160 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:161-165 | REDACTED:192-196 | REDACTED:394-398 | REDACTED:706-710 | REDACTED:868-872 | REDACTED:1116-1120 — there are 8 copies across 5 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 8 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 6) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 6) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:451 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:451-455 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py:703-707 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:121-125 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:173-177 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:227-231 | eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py:285-289 — before extracting anything, compare `eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py` and `eval_mm/vqaeval/models/MiniCPM/minicpmv.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 36 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 5) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 5) REDACTED:249 — REDACTED:249-253 | REDACTED:534-538 | REDACTED:804-808 | REDACTED:692-696 | eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py:85-89 — there are 5 copies across 3 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 5 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just after the matched lines, `REDACTED:256` calls `mcq_circular_eval` and `REDACTED:540` does not — after which the two agree again for 2 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (5 lines × 4) REDACTED:218 — REDACTED:218-222 | REDACTED:170-174 | REDACTED:365-369 | REDACTED:557-561 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (45 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (45 lines × 2) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:333 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:333-377 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:338-382 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (36 lines × 2) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (36 lines × 2) web_demos/web_demo.py:179 — web_demos/web_demo.py:179-214 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:171-206 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/web_demo.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 95 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (21 lines × 4) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:95 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:95-115 | web_demos/web_demo.py:118-138 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:111-131 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:102-122 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:132 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:132-139 | web_demos/web_demo.py:153-160 | web_demos/web_demo_2.5.py:145-152 | web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py:137-144 — before extracting anything, compare `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py` and `web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 15 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 278 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:132` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×1
  • Low cohesion: BaseModel (LCOM4 4) eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py:6 — BaseModel's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
P1 · CI/CD gates · No CI pipeline · ×1
  • No CI pipeline — No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.
R1 · Type Safety · Type Safety · ×1
  • Type Safety — 0 typed · 37 plain JS — the untyped files are web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/App.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/apis/index.js, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/CallHeader/index.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/CountDown/index.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/DelayTips/index.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ExtraInfo/index.vue (+31 more).
R10 · Code Duplication · Wholesale file copy (485 identical lines × 2 files) · ×1
  • Wholesale file copy (485 identical lines × 2 files) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:63 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:63 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:68 — these 2 files are line-for-line copies of one another — 485 lines are identical, in the same order, in every one of them — so this is one fact about the file set, not a block to extract. An edit made to one file and not the others changes behaviour silently, which is the failure a wholesale copy guarantees. Pick one file as the single source and derive the others from it (re-export it, spread it into the local overrides each variant genuinely needs, or generate the copies at build time) — the few lines that differ between the files are exactly the part each variant should still own. Check first whether the copies are deliberately standalone deliverables (a translation file seeded from its sibling and waiting to be translated); where they are, the duplication is the design, and the honest move is to mark the seeded file as untranslated rather than to let it pass as done.
R10 · Code Duplication · Wholesale file copy (414 identical lines × 2 files) · ×1
  • Wholesale file copy (414 identical lines × 2 files) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:50 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:50 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:54 — these 2 files are line-for-line copies of one another — 414 lines are identical, in the same order, in every one of them — so this is one fact about the file set, not a block to extract. An edit made to one file and not the others changes behaviour silently, which is the failure a wholesale copy guarantees. Pick one file as the single source and derive the others from it (re-export it, spread it into the local overrides each variant genuinely needs, or generate the copies at build time) — the few lines that differ between the files are exactly the part each variant should still own. Check first whether the copies are deliberately standalone deliverables (a translation file seeded from its sibling and waiting to be translated); where they are, the duplication is the design, and the honest move is to mark the seeded file as untranslated rather than to let it pass as done.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (266 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (266 matched lines × 2 locations) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:77 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:77 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:64 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 1701 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (67 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (67 lines × 2 locations) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:184 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:184 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue:215 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 3 locations) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:215 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue:215 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue:246 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/SelectTimbre/index.vue:53 — the 3 copies are spread across 3 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useVoice.js:21 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useVoice.js:21 · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/merge.js:44 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
R3 · Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue · ×1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue: 950 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue:1 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue has 950 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue · ×1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue: 945 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue:1 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue has 945 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue · ×1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue: 813 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue:1 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue has 813 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue · ×1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue: 810 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue:1 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue has 810 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue · ×1
  • web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue: 450 lines of code web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue:1 — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue has 450 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R4 · Test Coverage · Test Coverage · ×1
  • Test Coverage — 0% of 36 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count
R6 · Tooling · No test or typecheck script · ×1
  • No test or typecheck script — test ✗ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✗ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~814 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~814 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~800 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~800 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~705 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~705 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~701 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~701 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall_0105.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~288 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~288 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~260 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~260 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelConfig/index copy.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~132 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~132 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/merge.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 4 in-repo import(s) from 4 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VideoCall_0105.vue, web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/VoiceCall.vue and 1 more) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~128 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~128 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~120 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~120 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/Voice/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~95 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~95 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useQueue.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~91 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~91 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/utils/websocket.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~71 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~71 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/SelectTimbre/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~70 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~70 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/LikeAndDislike/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~62 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~62 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/CountDown/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~61 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~61 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useHttp.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~44 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~44 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/utils/index.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~43 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~43 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/ModelOutput/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~38 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~38 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useVoice.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~36 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~36 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/audioBufferToMp3Base64.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~32 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~32 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/SvgIcon/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~29 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~29 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/views/home/components/mergeMp3Base64.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~21 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~21 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/apis/index.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~19 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~19 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/components/IdeasList/index.vue — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~10 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~10 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/menu/index.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/index.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~9 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~9 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useRandomId.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/hooks/useHttp.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~8 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~8 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/directives/index.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~5 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~5 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/guard/index.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~1 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~1 LoC) web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/guard/stateGuard.js — no import path from any entry point (2 application, 3 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/src/router/guard/index.js) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@element-plus/icons-vue' · ×1
  • Unused dependency '@element-plus/icons-vue' — Declared in web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@iconify-json/fluent' · ×1
  • Unused dependency '@iconify-json/fluent' — Declared in web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@iconify-json/material-symbols' · ×1
  • Unused dependency '@iconify-json/material-symbols' — Declared in web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/web_server/package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Minor — 62 finding(s)
X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×25
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:175 — `"=" in expression1 and "=" in expression2` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py:231 — `'answer' in data and 'prediction' in data` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/cmmmu.py, REDACTED. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate REDACTED:183 — `'hint' in line and not pd.isna(line['hint'])` appears character-identically in 3 files — REDACTED, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate REDACTED:159 — `cache_path is not None and check_integrity(cache_path)` appears character-identically in 8 files — REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate REDACTED:178 — `cand in line and not pd.isna(line[cand])` appears character-identically in 4 files — REDACTED, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_mcq.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/utils/result_transfer.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_yorn.py:82 — `dataset is not None and listinstr(['MME'], dataset)` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_yorn.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/minicpm_v.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:278 — `division_result_1.is_Integer and division_result_1 != 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:279 — `division_result_2.is_Integer and division_result_2 != 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:228 — `expr1_sym.has(sp.Symbol) and not expr2_sym.has(sp.Symbol)` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:153 — `expression1 == expression2 and expression1 != "" and expression2 != ""` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:81 — `file_md5 is None or md5(data_path) == file_md5` appears character-identically in 4 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py, REDACTED, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_base.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:266 — `files_cnts[1] + videos_cnt == 1 and files_cnts[0] + images_cnt > 0` appears character-identically in 2 files — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py, web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py:39 — `hasattr(model, 'use_custom_prompt') and model.use_custom_prompt(dataset_name)` appears character-identically in 3 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_mt.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/inference_video.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:61 — `idx in image_map and len(image_map[idx]) > 64` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py, REDACTED. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:287 — `inter1[0] != inter2[0] or inter1[-1] != inter2[-1]` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/run.py:385 — `isinstance(eval_results, dict) or isinstance(eval_results, pd.DataFrame)` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/run.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/tools.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py:19 — `isinstance(item['answer'], float) and math.isnan(item['answer'])` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/dude.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/slidevqa.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py:131 — `isinstance(line, pd.Series) or isinstance(line, dict)` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/image_base.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/text_base.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:159 — `isinstance(msg, dict) and 'role' in msg and 'content' in msg` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py:381 — `len(_chat_bot) <= 1 or not _chat_bot[-1][1]` appears character-identically in 2 files — web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/chatbot_web_demo_o2.6.py, web_demos/web_demo_2.6.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py:75 — `len(s.split()) > 10 and not re.search('[ABCDE]', s)` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/longvideobench.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/multiple_choice.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate web_demos/web_demo_streamlit-2_5.py:95 — `len(st.session_state.chat_history) > 1 and st.session_state.chat_history[-2]["image"] is not None` appears character-identically in 2 files — web_demos/web_demo_streamlit-2_5.py, web_demos/web_demo_streamlit.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py:230 — `message is not None and self.check_content(message) == 'listdict'` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/api/base.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/vlm/base.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:229 — `not expr1_sym.has(sp.Symbol) and expr2_sym.has(sp.Symbol)` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
  • Duplicated predicate eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:231 — `not expr1_sym.has(sp.Symbol) and not expr2_sym.has(sp.Symbol)` appears character-identically in 2 files — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py, eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
M4 · Documentation accuracy · README/code drift · ×11
  • README/code drift docs/deployment_en.md:158 — docs/deployment_en.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift docs/deployment_zh.md:157 — docs/deployment_zh.md documents the environment variable `USE_FLAGOS`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README.md:23 — eval_mm/README.md runs `./scripts/run_inference.sh $MODELNAME $DATALIST`, but `scripts/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README.md:39 — eval_mm/README.md names `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py`, but no file or folder `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README.md:107 — eval_mm/README.md runs `./shell/run_inference.sh`, but `shell/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README.md:173 — eval_mm/README.md runs `./shell/run_transform.sh`, but `shell/run_transform.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README_zh.md:24 — eval_mm/README_zh.md runs `./scripts/run_inference.sh $MODELNAME $DATALIST`, but `scripts/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README_zh.md:40 — eval_mm/README_zh.md names `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py`, but no file or folder `vlmeval/utils/dataset_config.py` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README_zh.md:107 — eval_mm/README_zh.md runs `./shell/run_inference.sh`, but `shell/run_inference.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/README_zh.md:171 — eval_mm/README_zh.md runs `./shell/run_transform.sh`, but `shell/run_transform.sh` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
  • README/code drift eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/README.md:16 — eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/ccocr_evaluator/README.md documents the environment variable `SUB_OUTPUT_DIR`, but no code, script or configuration file names it. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong.
X4 · Structured logging · Interpolated log message defeats structured logging · ×7
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging REDACTED:102 — `warning` at line 102 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging REDACTED:170 — `error` at line 170 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.error("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.error("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging REDACTED:212 — `error` at line 212 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.error("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.error("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging REDACTED:220 — `info` at line 220 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.info("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.info("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging REDACTED:212 — `warning` at line 212 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging REDACTED:220 — `warning` at line 220 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging finetune/dataset.py:150 — `warning` at line 150 is handed an f-string as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, every occurrence reads as a different message, and the string is built even when the record is filtered out. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warning("order %s moved to %s", order_id, status)` with the standard library's `logging`, which keeps the message and its arguments apart on the record, or `log.warning("order moved", order_id=order_id, status=status)` with structlog.
X7 · Silent fallback defaults · Silent fallback default in catch · ×4
  • Silent fallback default in catch eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/mmmath.py:244 — `expression_equal` swallows every exception into `return False` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
  • Silent fallback default in catch eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/mmniah.py:285 — `is_correct` swallows every exception into `return 0` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
  • Silent fallback default in catch eval_mm/vlmevalkit/vlmeval/dataset/utils/olympiadbench.py:309 — `expression_equal` swallows every exception into `return False` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
  • Silent fallback default in catch REDACTED:71 — `istype` swallows every exception into `return False` — a data error becomes a silent behavior change with no trail. Log the failure or let it raise. If that constant is the correct answer rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, say so in a comment on the handler or in the docstring, and the row stops firing.
D16 · Bus Factor · Off-boarding risk · ×1
  • Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 1 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: web_demos/web_demo_streamlit-minicpmv2_6.py. Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
D16 · Bus Factor · Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1
  • Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 1 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (2 single-owned of 96 analysed files in total, counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 96 of the 118 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #2 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above. The files folded here: web_demos/minicpm-o_2.6/vad_utils.py.
D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1
  • No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.
D26 · Project Cohesion · Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1
  • Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 4 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 5.0/10. The most over is `eval_mm/vlmevalkit` (19549 LoC, 160 module-visible types across 9 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Low CVE · ×1
  • REDACTED
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Low IaC · ×1
  • REDACTED
D9 · Test Distribution · No tests found · ×1
  • No tests found — No test suite could be collected — no discoverable tests to count. If this repository does test, wiring the suite to a framework a runner can collect (pytest or unittest) is what makes it countable here; a pipeline step that invokes a runner is not evidence on its own, because a runner over an empty suite passes. Tests written as plain executables or shell/PowerShell harnesses are not collectible this way and are not scored here.
M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1
  • No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
M3 · Folder & project structure · No src/ separation · ×1
  • No src/ separation — Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
P2 · Observability · Logging is not universal · ×1
  • Logging is not universal — Only 3/4 runnable modules use logging (modules with no entry point or server are excluded — they are libraries a runnable module hosts). Silent: `eval_mm/vqaeval`.
P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1
  • No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add bandit, `semgrep --config=p/python`, or CodeQL's python pack — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
P6 · Release Hygiene · No changelog · ×1
  • No changelog — No CHANGELOG/HISTORY/RELEASES file — what shipped when isn't easy to reconstruct for support or audit. (Versioning/tagging makes releases traceable, but a changelog records the what.)
S1 · Web-Security Posture · No security response headers detected · ×1
  • No security response headers detected REDACTED:62 — None of the 11 security response headers the OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends (Content-Security-Policy, Strict-Transport-Security, X-Content-Type-Options, X-Frame-Options, …) is configured — defense in depth, even when a reverse proxy could set them. This is reported because `REDACTED` is committed to this repository and declares the server that serves it, so the configuration that would carry these headers is in this repository and was read in full. (−2.0 on this card.)
Minor — 68 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×68
  • Outdated: accelerate — `accelerate` is pinned to 0.30.1, but 1.15.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.30.1 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: aiofiles — `aiofiles` is pinned to 23.2.1, but 25.1.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 23.2.1 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: aiohttp — `aiohttp` is pinned to 3.8.4, but 3.14.5 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 3.8.4 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: aiosignal — `aiosignal` is pinned to 1.3.1, but 1.4.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 1.3.1 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: async-timeout — `async-timeout` is pinned to 4.0.2, but 5.0.1 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 4.0.2 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: attrs — `attrs` is pinned to 22.2.0, but 26.1.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 22.2.0 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: bitsandbytes — `bitsandbytes` is pinned to 0.37.0, but 0.50.2 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.37.0 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: cchardet — `cchardet` is pinned to 2.1.7, but 2.4.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 2.1.7 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: chardet — `chardet` is pinned to 5.1.0, but 7.7.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 5.1.0 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: contourpy — `contourpy` is pinned to 1.0.7, but 1.4.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 1.0.7 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: cycler — `cycler` is pinned to 0.11.0, but 0.12.1 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.11.0 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: editdistance — `editdistance` is pinned to 0.6.2, but 0.8.1 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.6.2 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: einops — `einops` is pinned to 0.8.0, but 0.8.2 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.8.0 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: fairscale — `fairscale` is pinned to 0.4.0, but 0.4.13 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.4.0 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: filelock — `filelock` is pinned to 3.9.0, but 4.2.4 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 3.9.0 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: fonttools — `fonttools` is pinned to 4.38.0, but 4.67.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 4.38.0 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: frozenlist — `frozenlist` is pinned to 1.3.3, but 1.8.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 1.3.3 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: gradio — `gradio` is pinned to 3.24.1, but 6.30.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 3.24.1 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: gradio-client — `gradio-client` is pinned to 0.0.8, but 2.7.2 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.0.8 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: huggingface-hub — `huggingface-hub` is pinned to 0.13.4, but 2.2.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.13.4 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: importlib-resources — `importlib-resources` is pinned to 5.12.0, but 7.1.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 5.12.0 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: kiwisolver — `kiwisolver` is pinned to 1.4.4, but 1.5.1 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 1.4.4 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: librosa — `librosa` is pinned to 0.9.0, but 1.0.0 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 0.9.0 until the declaration is edited. This crosses a major version, so it is a migration rather than a bump.
  • Outdated: markdown2 — `markdown2` is pinned to 2.4.10, but 2.5.5 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 2.4.10 until the declaration is edited.
  • Outdated: matplotlib — `matplotlib` is pinned to 3.7.0, but 3.11.2 is the current stable release on PyPI. An exact pin never moves on its own, so this repository installs 3.7.0 until the declaration is edited.
  • + 43 more in this group — see findings.md.

Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail

Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-6287de8a468a4a81825055109c3302cf/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-6287de8a468a4a81825055109c3302cf/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrep—semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .68artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update56artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy config --format json --quiet .5artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.0—
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signingprovenance—provenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.0—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosure—disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0—
D40 · Network Egress Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D43 · Malicious Dependenciestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update0artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a15a81-2c2a-70cd-b8e3-fdebb433977a · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Downloadable artifacts

Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif⬇ Health changelog .md