Devtest Melissa Fagundes

[melffagundes]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

AI Detection Analysis 🔍

Confidence Score: 25%

Reasoning: The code and associated materials in the pull request show a well-structured, clearly organized, and contextually coherent implementation of a FastAPI-based microservice to track elevator usage and generate related events and data. While the coding style is clean and consistent, it closely aligns with how a mid-level developer with experience in web backends might write a testable, containerized Python application. The code contains domain reasoning (e.g., distinguishing MOVE from REST states, demand triggering events), strong filename conventions, and simple test coverage—all suggesting a project thoughtfully constructed by a developer rather than generated by AI.

Further, the project includes a localized README in Brazilian Portuguese with emojis and human touches, which, while not impossible for an AI to generate, adds a uniqueness and personality layer less commonly seen in AI-generated content.

Key Indicators:

• Use of FastAPI, SQLAlchemy, and Dockerfile with appropriate sensible defaults shows domain expertise.
• README copy is in Portuguese with emojis and human-centric instructions, unlikely to be purely AI-generated unless instructed to mimic this style.
• Test files target specific business logic paths (e.g., testing elevator status updates and demand generation), indicative of human foresight and planning.
• Variable naming and structure are consistent and logical, but not robotic or overly generic, as is typical in some AI outputs.
• No signs of verbose or repetitious language as sometimes found in AI-generated code or documentation.

Based on these considerations, this pull request appears to be primarily authored by a human.

✅ No strong indicators of AI generation detected

[github-actions]

AI Detection Analysis 🔍

Confidence Score: 35%

Reasoning:
This pull request reflects competent and structured development work in Python using FastAPI, SQLAlchemy, and pytest. It involves the creation of a backend system for collecting elevator events, complete with routes, database models, schemas, testing, requirements, and Dockerization. The style and decisions indicate familiarity with modern Python backend development practices.

The code demonstrates adherence to standard conventions, appropriate modularity, and thoughtful data modeling (e.g., separating ElevatorEvents and Demands). However, there's no clear sign of excessive generalization, odd formatting, or hallucinated logic that tends to show up in AI-generated submissions. It seems like the developer had a clear understanding of how to formalize this system, possibly as part of a test or practical project (given the "Devtest" in the title).

While some parts such as the documentation (README) and consistent naming/style could theoretically be produced by an advanced AI, the integrated and idiomatic use of frameworks like FastAPI, along with hand-written tests that cover expected behaviors, lean toward human authorship.

Key Indicators:

• 🧠 Logical structure and clean separation of concerns typical of human developers.
• 🧪 Well-written and meaningful unit tests with appropriate fixtures and assertions.
• 🐍 Correct usage of Python idioms and libraries (e.g., SQLAlchemy, FastAPI).
• 📚 README draft appears brief and might have been quickly written or reused, slightly weakening the human-authored confidence.
• 🔧 File and function names are semantically coherent and contextually appropriate.

Conclusion: The code is more likely to have been written by a human, possibly for a coding assessment or a small project. While there’s a small chance an advanced AI could output something similar, the depth and correctness suggest human input.

✅ No strong indicators of AI generation detected

[dchecks]

Is there anything interesting in this submission that you would want to chat about?

[melffagundes]

Hi! If I had more time, I could create an Agentic Rag pipeline. El El mié, 25 jun 2025 a la(s) 19:33, Dan ***@***.***> escribió:

…

*dchecks* left a comment (Citric-Sheep/devtest#72) <#72 (comment)> Is there anything interesting in this submission that you would want to chat about? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#72 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC2TPHZCYBPMXKPMHB7YWQT3FMPS7AVCNFSM6AAAAAB7ZF5N7OVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZTAMBWGQZTENZYGU> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>