Score breakdown
🧬 Most similar developers
Closest profile, nearby score
🔥 Full roast
🔥 8 years on GitHub, only 10 merged PRs total, nearly 8 in 10 are just adding paper links to other people's READMEs, even your 3 diffusers PRs are window dressing — your open-source resume is polished w
viiika — 75.60/100 · SOLID (Solid · Trustworthy)
TL;DR: Legit research cred on paper (Meissonic 344 stars, Prism ICML 2026) and a couple real code fixes, but 8 years on GitHub with only 10 total merged PRs and 80% of recent external work being README/paper-list polish is open-source resume theater at its finest.
| Dimension | Score | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Account maturity | 10/10 | 8 years old, 9 years of active contribution history, last activity only 18 days ago |
| Original project quality | 12.5/18 | 440 total stars across 26 original repos, top repo Meissonic has 344 stars (ICLR 2025 paper companion), but most other top-starred repos are course material dumps, awesome lists, or paper implementations with minimal standalone utility — the star count looks impressive until you realize most of it is academic packaging, not usable tools |
| Contribution quality | 16.6/27 | 10 merged PRs out of 16 total, 2 author-closed external PRs, 0 maintainer-rejected PRs; 8 of 10 recent merged PRs are trivial doc-like touch-ups, only 1 verified core engineering impact PR across all-time popular repo contributions — your PR portfolio is 80% window dressing, 20% actual work |
| Ecosystem / maintenance impact | 18.3/20 | 10 substantial PRs/commits into repos with up to 33,952 stars (including 3 PRs to huggingface/diffusers, 1 to Alpha-VLLM/Lumina-DiMOO), but 8 of these all-time impact PRs lack file-level verification, and nearly all are README/paper-list additions rather than core code changes — you're contributing to the biggest repos in the space, but only to polish their front porch |
| Community influence | 5/8 | 99 followers, 60 following — barely any community traction despite 8 years of activity, your follower count is lower than the star count of your own top repo |
| Activity authenticity | 13.2/17 | 160 contributions last year, 3 activity types, but the vast majority of recent external work is low-effort doc-like PRs with no meaningful code changes — your activity graph looks busy, but most of it is just moving text around in READMEs |
Red flags
- 80% of recent external merged PRs are trivial doc-like touch-ups (paper list additions, README tweaks) to other people's popular repos, with 8 of 10 total merged PRs falling into this bucket
- Only 1 verified core engineering impact PR across all 10 all-time popular-repo contributions, despite 8 years of account activity
- Total merged PR count (10) is extremely low for an 8-year-old account, even with recent high commit activity on personal repos
- Nearly half of top-starred original repos are course material dumps, awesome lists, or paper companion projects with minimal standalone engineering value
Score calibration No extra adjustment. The base score already reflects the balance between your legitimate research project quality and your low-volume, documentation-heavy external contribution pattern.
Verdict Normal, but with clear limitations. You have real research credentials and occasional meaningful code contributions, but your overall contribution pattern is heavily skewed toward low-effort external doc work and shockingly thin PR volume for your account age — you're a solid research contributor, not a core open-source engineer.
📌 Pin to your GitHub profile
Copy any snippet below into your Profile README. The score stays up to date automatically, and the image links to your detail page.
[](https://githubroast.dev/u/viiika)<a href="https://githubroast.dev/u/viiika"><img src="https://githubroast.dev/api/badge/viiika" alt="GitHub Roast score badge" /></a>[](https://githubroast.dev/u/viiika)<a href="https://githubroast.dev/u/viiika"><img src="https://githubroast.dev/api/card/viiika" alt="GitHub Roast" width="600" /></a>