Disclaimer & Assessment Methodology

This score was produced via LLM-assisted assessment of the repository structure and the supplied evidence bundle. These findings should be treated as a directional pilot signal rather than a verified rating. For more details on our pilot objectives and the development path toward rules-based human review, see the Development Roadmap. Raw files are accessible at the assessment report source.

Evidence Chain Assessment

PyPSA-Earth Assessment

Assessed Claim

"Open energy-system optimisation workflows can support transparent power/sector-coupled planning."

PyPSA-Earth shows strong open-source and reproducibility infrastructure: it is a public, version-controlled energy-system modelling repository with AGPL/CC SPDX licensing statements, citation metadata linking a software release to DOI publications, documented dependencies, Docker and conda-lock environments, multi-platform CI testing, objective-value regression checks, documentation builds, and visible contribution/community channels. Its weakest traceability area in the supplied evidence is open input-data evidence: the README states that data are automatically retrieved from open sources, but the bundle does not include the actual source catalogue, dataset provenance, licences, measurement methods, uncertainty, quality controls, or versioned input-data artifacts. Overall, the project is highly open as software and moderately-to-strongly traceable as a modelling workflow, but the supplied materials do not establish a complete end-to-end, claim-specific linkage from exact data inputs through code version, configuration, run outputs, review record, and publication.

72 Traceability Score
Substantial Traceability
Project Source Source Repository
Framework Version v1.0.0
Assessment Date 2026-06-12
Human Review Pending

Claim Traceability Pathway

Inspection trail mapping the connections from raw inputs to the published claim.

Stage 01 Input Data
Score: 56
Stage 02 Models & Software
Score: 86
Stage 03 Execution Run
Score: 78
Stage 04 Community Review
Score: 73
Stage 05 Publication
Score: 79
Target Claim Stated Claim
Claim
Strong inspectability (≥80)
Moderate inspectability (55-79)
Weak inspectability (<55)
Open Linkage Connection

Traceability Health Summary

Scan diagnosis of where the evidence chain stands and what requires attention first.

Strongest Area

Open-Source Models, Methods, and Software

Inspectability: 86/100

This stage provides solid evidence, making calculations and documentation highly inspectable and reusable for external actors.

Traceability Gap

Open Input Data and Measurement Evidence

Inspectability: 56/100

This is the weakest segment of the evidence chain. Gaps in records or lack of linkage break the evidence chain here.

Missing Artifacts
  • Unique dataset DOIs & licenses
  • Scrutiny logs & replication results
  • Dynamic provenance graph mapping
First Priority Action

Strengthen Open Input Data and Measurement Evidence

Register raw dataset bundles with persistent repositories (e.g. Zenodo) and define licensing metadata.

62 Traceability Score
Framework Metric

Evidence Linkage Summary

Open Linkage is not a standalone category; it is the connectivity of the evidence chain. Below is the connection status of the connection links between each step in this project's journey.

Linkage Summary

There is moderate-to-strong evidence of linkage across some parts of the chain: CITATION.cff links a named paper, DOI, repository, version, and release date; the README links the model to documentation, publications, data/status resources, and community channels; workflows link tests to lock files, logs, objective values, and reference objective CSVs; and documentation snippets are explicitly derived from config.default.yaml. These are meaningful traceability links. However, the supplied evidence does not provide a complete explicit chain from a specific environmental claim to exact input datasets, input versions, preprocessing transformations, code commit or release, model configuration, workflow run, outputs, review record, and publication text. The data-source linkage is especially incomplete, and CI/test linkage does not necessarily correspond to the published claims. The score is therefore above moderate but below the high range required for an explicit, versioned, externally verifiable end-to-end evidence chain.

Detailed Dimension Inspection

Granular findings for each processing step in the Open Traceability framework.

Stage 01

Open Input Data and Measurement Evidence

Score: 56/100

Summary: There is moderate public evidence that PyPSA-Earth is designed around open and externally retrievable input data: the README states that all data needed for simulations are automatically and flexibly retrieved from open sources, including sectoral demand, generation capacities, networks, and renewable potentials, and the contribution guide describes public dataset contributions and bundle specifications. This supports a score above the fragmentary range.

Evidence Found

There is moderate public evidence that PyPSA-Earth is designed around open and externally retrievable input data: the README states that all data needed for simulations are automatically and flexibly retrieved from open sources, including sectoral demand, generation capacities, networks, and renewable potentials, and the contribution guide describes public dataset contributions and bundle specifications. This supports a score above the fragmentary range.

Gaps Identified

However, the supplied evidence bundle does not include the actual data-source catalogue, bundle_config.yaml, dataset licences, provenance for each source, primary-data links, measurement methods, quality-control procedures, quantified uncertainty, or versioned input-data releases. Because Open Traceability requires input origins, transformations, uncertainty, reuse conditions, and verification to be inspectable, the score is limited to the mid range rather than high.

Stage 02

Open-Source Models, Methods, and Software

Score: 86/100

Summary: The supplied evidence gives strong public support for open-source software traceability. The project is hosted in a public GitHub repository, describes itself as an open optimisation model, includes SPDX licensing headers and an AGPL-3.0-or-later citation/README licence statement, provides dependency specifications in environment.yaml and documentation requirements, and includes Docker infrastructure for building a reproducible software environment. CI workflows also show linting, type checking, CodeQL, and documentation builds. The score is not higher because the GitHub metadata reports license as null, the supplied evidence does not include a full LICENSE file or complete source tree, and some execution infrastructure may depend on external services or solvers such as Gurobi. Still, the model and software evidence is strong, version-controlled, inspectable, and reusable.

Evidence Found

The supplied evidence gives strong public support for open-source software traceability. The project is hosted in a public GitHub repository, describes itself as an open optimisation model, includes SPDX licensing headers and an AGPL-3.0-or-later citation/README licence statement, provides dependency specifications in environment.yaml and documentation requirements, and includes Docker infrastructure for building a reproducible software environment. CI workflows also show linting, type checking, CodeQL, and documentation builds. The score is not higher because the GitHub metadata reports license as null, the supplied evidence does not include a full LICENSE file or complete source tree, and some execution infrastructure may depend on external services or solvers such as Gurobi. Still, the model and software evidence is strong, version-controlled, inspectable, and reusable.

Gaps Identified

No significant gaps identified. This stage is fully documented and verifiable.

Inspectable Evidence Artifacts (5)
Public repository metadata

"Repository description: “PyPSA-Earth: A flexible Python-based open optimisation model to study energy system futures around the world”; default branch is main and repository is public in the evidence bundle."

Relevance: Establishes that the model software is publicly hosted and version-controlled.
README licence and open-source status

"README includes SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3.0-or-later, a License: AGPL v3 badge, and describes PyPSA-Earth as an open-source global energy system model."

Relevance: Supports open-source licensing and public inspectability of model code and methods.
CITATION.cff software metadata

"CITATION.cff lists repository-code as https://github.com/pypsa-meets-earth/pypsa-earth, version 1.0.0, date-released 2023-04-18, and SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3.0-or-later."

Relevance: Provides citable, versioned software metadata connecting the model to a release and publication.
Conda environment

"environment.yaml specifies the pypsa-earth environment, channels, Python version, PyPSA, atlite, powerplantmatching, earth-osm, Snakemake, solvers, geospatial, plotting, and other dependencies."

Relevance: Documents dependencies and configuration needed to understand and run the model.
Dockerfile

"Dockerfile builds from condaforge/mambaforge, creates the pypsa-earth environment from envs/linux-64.lock.yaml, installs OpenJDK, and activates the environment."

Relevance: Provides open infrastructure for packaging and running the software environment.
Stage 03

Open Execution and Reproducibility

Score: 78/100

Summary: There is strong evidence for reproducible execution infrastructure: the project uses Snakemake-related dependencies, locked environments for multiple platforms, a Dockerfile, multi-platform CI tests, artifacts containing logs/results, objective extraction from solver logs, reference objective comparison, and workflows to update locked environments and reference objectives. This makes the computational path more inspectable than simply releasing code. The score is not higher because the supplied evidence does not show the exact published-paper run, exact input data versions, complete scenario parameters, archived outputs, or a re-executable workflow record linking a specific environmental claim to specific data and code versions. CI artifacts also have short retention in the evidence shown. Therefore reproducibility is strong at the software/test-workflow level

Evidence Found

There is strong evidence for reproducible execution infrastructure: the project uses Snakemake-related dependencies, locked environments for multiple platforms, a Dockerfile, multi-platform CI tests, artifacts containing logs/results, objective extraction from solver logs, reference objective comparison, and workflows to update locked environments and reference objectives. This makes the computational path more inspectable than simply releasing code. The score is not higher because the supplied evidence does not show the exact published-paper run, exact input data versions, complete scenario parameters, archived outputs, or a re-executable workflow record linking a specific environmental claim to specific data and code versions. CI artifacts also have short retention in the evidence shown. Therefore reproducibility is strong at the software/test-workflow level

Gaps Identified

but incomplete for exact claim reproduction.

Stage 04

Open Community and Review

Score: 73/100

Summary: The project has strong public evidence of open community processes: a public GitHub repository with hundreds of open issues, a contri

Evidence Found

The project has strong public evidence of open community processes: a public GitHub repository with hundreds of open issues, a contri

Gaps Identified

bution guide inviting questions, feedback, bugs, features, documentation, regional expertise, and datasets, CI checks on pull requests, Discord/community links, and peer-reviewed Applied Energy publications referenced in project metadata. These features make scrutiny and contri

Stage 05

Open Publications and Communication

Score: 79/100

Summary: The project communicates its claims and methods through a public README, ReadTheDocs documentation link, citation metadata, DOI-linked Applied Energy publications, documentation CI, and generated configuration documentation snippets that are intended to stay synchronized with config.default.yaml. The README clearly states the model purpose, scope, sectors, and intended use, and CITATION.cff provides citation metadata for a specific release and paper. This merits a strong score. The score is not higher because the supplied evidence does not show the full documentation pages, publication accessibility/licensing terms, version history for dynamic outputs, detailed update cycles, or all supporting artifacts cited from the publications. Open communication is strong,

Evidence Found

The project communicates its claims and methods through a public README, ReadTheDocs documentation link, citation metadata, DOI-linked Applied Energy publications, documentation CI, and generated configuration documentation snippets that are intended to stay synchronized with config.default.yaml. The README clearly states the model purpose, scope, sectors, and intended use, and CITATION.cff provides citation metadata for a specific release and paper. This merits a strong score. The score is not higher because the supplied evidence does not show the full documentation pages, publication accessibility/licensing terms, version history for dynamic outputs, detailed update cycles, or all supporting artifacts cited from the publications. Open communication is strong,

Gaps Identified

but complete publication traceability for each claim is not fully established in the bundle.

Inspectable Evidence Artifacts (6)
README project communication

"README describes PyPSA-Earth as a global sector-coupled open-source multi-energy system model and explains its scope across electricity, heating, transport, industry, hydrogen, and more."

Relevance: Provides accessible public explanation of the project’s environmental/energy-system modelling claims and scope.
README publications

"README lists academic publications for the power model and sector-coupled model, including DOI links."

Relevance: Connects project communication to formal publications supporting the model.
CITATION.cff

"CITATION.cff gives title, abstract, authors, ORCIDs for several authors, DOI 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121096, repository-code URL, version 1.0.0, and release date."

Relevance: Provides standardized citation and publication metadata that improves publication traceability.
Documentation requirements

"Documentation stack includes mkdocs, mkdocs-material, mkdocstrings, mkdocs-git-revision-date-localized-plugin, and related packages."

Relevance: Shows tooling for generating public documentation, including revision-date support.
Documentation CI

"Docs CI builds documentation with mkdocs build --strict and runs spelling checks on pull requests affecting documentation files."

Relevance: Supports quality control for public documentation.
Configuration snippets documentation

"Snippet README explains that YAML snippets are extracted from config.default.yaml so documentation pages stay in sync with the actual config file."

Relevance: Shows an effort to keep explanatory materials aligned with model configuration.
Stage 06

Open Linkage

Score: 62/100

Summary: There is moderate-to-strong evidence of linkage across some parts of the chain: CITATION.cff links a named paper, DOI, repository, version, and release date; the README links the model to documentation, publications, data/status resources, and community channels; workflows link tests to lock files, logs, objective values, and reference objective CSVs; and documentation snippets are explicitly derived from config.default.yaml. These are meaningful traceability links.

Evidence Found

There is moderate-to-strong evidence of linkage across some parts of the chain: CITATION.cff links a named paper, DOI, repository, version, and release date; the README links the model to documentation, publications, data/status resources, and community channels; workflows link tests to lock files, logs, objective values, and reference objective CSVs; and documentation snippets are explicitly derived from config.default.yaml. These are meaningful traceability links.

Gaps Identified

However, the supplied evidence does not provide a complete explicit chain from a specific environmental claim to exact input datasets, input versions, preprocessing transformations, code commit or release, model configuration, workflow run, outputs, review record, and publication text. The data-source linkage is especially incomplete, and CI/test linkage does not necessarily correspond to the published claims. The score is therefore above moderate but below the high range required for an explicit, versioned, externally verifiable end-to-end evidence chain.

Inspectable Evidence Artifacts (6)
CITATION release-to-paper linkage

"CITATION.cff links the repository code to the Applied Energy paper DOI, software version 1.0.0, and release date 2023-04-18."

Relevance: Provides a specific link between publication, repository, and software version.
README links to publications and documentation

"README links to ReadTheDocs, DOI publications, PyPSA-Earth-Status, Google Drive, Discord, and the project repository context."

Relevance: Shows public cross-linking among communication, documentation, community, and supporting resources.
Test workflow linkage from run logs to objectives

"The test workflow extracts objective function values from solver log files and compares or reports them with reference objective values."

Relevance: Links execution artifacts, logs, and numerical outputs for reproducibility testing.
Reference objective utility

"extract_obj_for_path maps a run folder and log file to an objective value in test/utils/obj_ref.csv."

Relevance: Provides a concrete linkage mechanism between model-run artifacts and reference outputs.
Config snippet synchronization

"Documentation snippets are extracted from config.default.yaml and version-controlled to keep configuration examples synchronized with the actual config file."

Relevance: Links documentation to configuration artifacts, improving traceability of methods communication.
Environment lock workflow

"Workflow generates platform-specific lock files from envs/environment.yaml and creates pull requests for updates."

Relevance: Links dependency specifications to versioned reproducible environments, though not directly to a specific published claim.

Critical Traceability Gaps

Inspection details of where the evidence chain breaks down and what that implies for public trust.

Identified GapImpact on TraceabilitySuggested Remediation
Dataset not linked or versionedHigh ‐ Blocks inspection of inputsRegister raw datasets in Zenodo and cite unique DOIs in config files.
Review and replication logs hiddenMedium ‐ Hides validation gate processMaintain an open-source technical review tracker in public channels.

Remediation & Improvements Roadmap

Actionable roadmap prioritized by implementation complexity.

Phase 1

Quick Wins

Low effort, high immediate return.

  • Add CITATION.cff file

    Enables clear publication-to-repository citation schema.

  • Commit top-level LICENSE

    Resolves legal terms of software and dataset inspectability.

  • Link communication channels

    Add status/discord badges to repository README files.

Phase 2

Medium Effort

Standard engineering practices.

  • Specify configurations in config files

    Provide explicit parameters and dataset configurations in repository.

  • Lock computational environments

    Lock dependencies using Conda-lock or Docker image digests.

  • Archive automated workflow logs

    Publish CI test summaries and solver objective check values.

Phase 3

Strategic Upgrades

Highest traceability return.

  • Publish workflow runs on Zenodo

    Create persistent, immutable archives of the full execution outputs.

  • Build claims-to-evidence provenance graphs

    Establish a machine-readable map of the end-to-end evidence trail.

Framework Dimension Definitions

  • Open Input Data and Measurement Evidence: Identifiable, documented, attributable, versioned raw measurement evidence inputs.
  • Open-Source Models, Methods, and Software: Inspectability of Analytical logic via code repositories, configurations, and license files.
  • Open Execution and Reproducibility: Computational environments, workflows, run logs, and outputs make rerun processes inspectable.
  • Open Community and Review: Scrutiny, peer review, issue tracking, and responses to replication challenges are visible.
  • Open Publications and Communication: Resulting reports, papers, and dashboards are openly accessible and reference source materials.
  • Open Linkage: The versioned, explicit connectivity linking data, models, execution, review, and publication steps.

Human Review Notes

Human review of this assessment report is pending. An independent reviewer must inspect the repository references to verify the findings.