| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 14 decomposed | 10 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Defines conversational flows using Colang, a domain-specific language that compiles to state machines for managing dialog turns, branching logic, and context transitions. The Colang 2.x runtime executes these flows as event-driven state machines, processing user messages through defined states and triggering actions based on flow conditions. This enables declarative specification of multi-turn conversations without imperative control flow.
Unique: Uses a custom DSL (Colang) that compiles to event-driven state machines rather than relying on generic workflow engines; Colang 2.x introduces a complete rewrite with improved state semantics and event processing compared to 1.0
vs alternatives: More expressive than rule-based dialog systems and more maintainable than hand-coded state machines, but requires learning a new language unlike generic orchestration frameworks
Implements a configurable pipeline of safety and constraint enforcement layers that process requests before LLM invocation (input rails), after LLM generation (output rails), during dialog turns (dialog rails), before retrieval operations (retrieval rails), and around tool calls (tool rails). Each rail stage can apply custom validators, filters, and transformations using Python actions or LLM-based checks, enabling fine-grained control over what enters and exits the LLM.
Unique: Implements a staged pipeline architecture with separate rail types (input/output/dialog/retrieval/tool) rather than a monolithic filter, allowing different safety policies at different points in the request lifecycle; supports both rule-based and LLM-based enforcement
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than single-stage content filters and more flexible than hardcoded safety checks, but requires more configuration than simple prompt-based safety approaches
Integrates with embedding models (OpenAI, Hugging Face, local models) and vector stores (Chroma, Pinecone, FAISS) to support semantic search and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). Handles embedding generation, vector storage, similarity search, and result ranking. Supports both in-memory and persistent vector stores, enabling guardrails to retrieve relevant context for fact-checking, topic validation, and knowledge-based responses.
Unique: Integrates embeddings and vector stores as first-class components in guardrails, enabling semantic search and fact-checking without requiring separate RAG frameworks; supports multiple embedding models and vector store backends
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic RAG libraries and more flexible than hardcoded knowledge bases, but requires careful tuning of embedding models and similarity thresholds
Provides built-in observability through span-based tracing that tracks request flow, LLM calls, action execution, and rail decisions. Integrates with OpenTelemetry for distributed tracing, logs detailed execution traces, and supports exporting traces to external systems (Datadog, Jaeger, etc.). Enables debugging of complex guardrail flows and performance monitoring of LLM calls.
Unique: Implements span-based tracing integrated with OpenTelemetry rather than simple logging, enabling distributed tracing across microservices and detailed performance analysis of guardrail execution
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than basic logging and more integrated than external monitoring tools, but adds complexity and overhead compared to simple print statements
Provides seamless integration with LangChain chains and agents, allowing guardrails to wrap LangChain components or be wrapped by them. Supports using LangChain tools within guardrails, integrating guardrails into LangChain agent loops, and sharing context between guardrails and chains. Enables building complex agentic systems with guardrails applied at multiple points in the execution flow.
Unique: Provides first-class LangChain integration that allows guardrails to wrap chains or be wrapped by them, rather than requiring manual integration code; supports bidirectional context passing
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic wrapper patterns and more flexible than LangChain's built-in safety features, but requires understanding both frameworks
Provides command-line tools for validating guardrail configurations, running tests, generating documentation, and deploying guardrails. Includes commands for checking YAML syntax, validating Colang flows, running test suites, and generating API documentation. Enables CI/CD integration and local development workflows without requiring Python code.
Unique: Provides dedicated CLI tools for guardrail-specific operations (config validation, Colang testing) rather than relying on generic Python testing frameworks; enables non-Python users to validate configurations
vs alternatives: More convenient than writing Python test code and more integrated than generic YAML validators, but less flexible than programmatic testing
Uses secondary LLM calls to validate outputs and detect attacks through structured prompting. Implements jailbreak detection by analyzing user inputs against known attack patterns, and hallucination detection by having the LLM verify its own outputs against retrieved facts or user context. These checks run asynchronously or synchronously depending on configuration, using the same LLM provider or a separate safety-focused model.
Unique: Implements LLM-based validation as a first-class rail type with support for specialized safety models (Nemotron Safety Guard, Nemotron Content Safety) rather than relying solely on rule-based detection; includes reasoning trace extraction for explainability
vs alternatives: More context-aware than regex/keyword-based jailbreak detection, but slower and more expensive than rule-based approaches; more reliable than single-model safety but requires careful prompt design
Uses semantic embeddings (via configurable embedding models) to classify user messages and LLM outputs against allowed topics and content categories. Compares input/output embeddings against a knowledge base of topic examples or safety categories, using cosine similarity thresholds to determine if content is on-topic or violates safety policies. This enables semantic understanding beyond keyword matching, supporting nuanced topic boundaries and content policies.
Unique: Implements semantic topic control via embeddings rather than keyword lists or regex patterns, allowing nuanced topic boundaries; integrates with configurable embedding models and vector stores for scalable topic management
vs alternatives: More semantically aware than keyword-based topic filtering and more flexible than rule-based systems, but requires careful example curation and threshold tuning unlike supervised classification models
+6 more capabilities
Aggregates 67 TB of source code from the Software Heritage archive, filtering for permissively licensed repositories (MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, etc.) across 600+ programming languages. Uses automated license detection and validation to ensure legal compliance for model training. Implements a rigorous deduplication pipeline at file and repository levels to eliminate redundant training data and reduce dataset bloat.
Unique: Largest open-source code dataset at 67 TB with automated opt-out governance allowing repository owners to request removal, combined with rigorous deduplication and PII removal pipeline — no other public dataset offers this scale with legal compliance and community control mechanisms
vs alternatives: Larger and more legally compliant than GitHub's CodeSearchNet (14M files) or Google's BigQuery public datasets, with explicit opt-out governance vs. implicit inclusion, and covers 600+ languages vs. Codex training data's undisclosed language distribution
Implements a community-driven opt-out system where repository owners can request removal of their code from the dataset without legal takedown notices. Maintains a registry of excluded repositories and re-applies exclusions during dataset updates. Provides transparent governance documentation and a clear submission process for removal requests, balancing open access with creator rights.
Unique: First large-scale code dataset to implement opt-out governance at dataset level rather than relying solely on license compliance, with transparent registry and community submission process — shifts power from dataset creators to code contributors
vs alternatives: More respectful of creator autonomy than GitHub Copilot's training approach (no opt-out) or academic datasets (one-time snapshot), and more scalable than individual DMCA takedowns
The Stack v2 scores higher at 61/100 vs NeMo Guardrails at 56/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Automated pipeline that scans source code for personally identifiable information (email addresses, API keys, SSH keys, credit card patterns, phone numbers) and removes or redacts them before dataset release. Uses regex patterns, entropy-based detection for secrets, and heuristic rules to identify sensitive data. Operates at file level with configurable sensitivity thresholds to balance data utility against privacy risk.
Unique: Combines regex pattern matching, entropy-based secret detection, and heuristic rules in a unified pipeline with configurable sensitivity — more comprehensive than simple regex-only approaches, but trades off false positive rate against security coverage
vs alternatives: More thorough than GitHub's secret scanning (which only flags known patterns) because it includes entropy-based detection for unknown secret formats, but less accurate than specialized tools like TruffleHog due to language-agnostic approach
Indexes 67 TB of source code across 600+ programming languages with language-aware metadata (syntax, file extension, language family). Enables retrieval by language, license, repository, or code patterns. Uses Software Heritage's existing indexing infrastructure as foundation, augmented with language detection and classification. Supports both bulk download and filtered queries for specific language subsets.
Unique: Leverages Software Heritage's existing language detection and indexing infrastructure, then augments with BigCode-specific language classification and filtering — avoids reinventing language detection while providing dataset-specific query capabilities
vs alternatives: More comprehensive language coverage (600+ languages) than GitHub's Linguist (500+ languages) and more accessible than Software Heritage's raw API because it's pre-filtered for permissive licenses and deduplicated
Removes duplicate code files and repositories using content hashing (SHA-256 or similar) and fuzzy matching for near-duplicates. Operates in two stages: exact deduplication via hash matching, then fuzzy matching (e.g., Jaccard similarity or MinHash) to catch semantically identical code with minor formatting differences. Preserves one canonical copy of each unique code pattern while removing redundant training examples.
Unique: Two-stage deduplication combining exact hash matching with fuzzy similarity matching (likely MinHash or Jaccard) to catch both identical and near-identical code — more thorough than single-stage approaches but computationally expensive
vs alternatives: More aggressive deduplication than CodeSearchNet (which uses simple hash matching) because it catches near-duplicates, but less semantic than clone detection tools (which understand code structure) because it's content-based
Integrates with Software Heritage's comprehensive archive of 200+ million repositories and their full version control history. Extracts source code snapshots from Software Heritage's Git/Mercurial/SVN repositories, preserving repository metadata (commit history, author info, timestamps). Provides access to code at specific points in time, enabling historical analysis or training on code evolution patterns.
Unique: Leverages Software Heritage's universal code archive (200M+ repositories) as data source, providing access to code that would be impossible to collect via GitHub API alone — enables training on archived/deleted repositories and non-GitHub platforms (GitLab, Gitea, etc.)
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than GitHub-only datasets because it includes code from GitLab, Gitea, SourceForge, and other platforms archived by Software Heritage; more legally defensible than web scraping because it uses an established, community-maintained archive
Tracks and validates SPDX license identifiers for each repository, ensuring only permissively licensed code (MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, etc.) is included. Maintains license metadata alongside code files, enabling downstream users to verify legal compliance. Implements license hierarchy and compatibility checking to handle dual-licensed or complex licensing scenarios.
Unique: Combines automated SPDX detection with manual review and maintains license metadata alongside code, enabling downstream users to verify compliance — more transparent than datasets that simply claim 'permissive licenses' without proof
vs alternatives: More legally rigorous than GitHub's CodeSearchNet (which doesn't validate licenses) and more transparent than Codex training data (which doesn't disclose license filtering at all)
Maintains versioned snapshots of the dataset (e.g., v2.0, v2.1) with documented changes between versions (new repositories added, deduplication improvements, PII removal updates). Provides checksums and manifests for reproducibility, enabling researchers to cite specific dataset versions and reproduce results. Tracks dataset lineage and transformation history.
Unique: Maintains semantic versioning and detailed changelogs for dataset releases, enabling researchers to cite specific versions and understand dataset evolution — more rigorous than one-off dataset releases without versioning
vs alternatives: More reproducible than academic datasets that are released once without versioning, and more transparent than commercial datasets (Codex) that don't disclose version history or changes
+2 more capabilities