ScienceQA vs gpt_academic — Trust Score Comparison

Side-by-side trust comparison of ScienceQA and gpt_academic. Scores based on security, compliance, maintenance, popularity, and ecosystem signals.

ScienceQA scores 0.0/100 (D) while gpt_academic scores 0.0/100 (C) on the Nerq Trust Score. The two agents are essentially tied on overall trust. ScienceQA is a research agent with 207 stars. gpt_academic is a research agent with 70,114 stars.
0.0
D
Categoryresearch
Stars207
Sourcehuggingface_dataset_v2
Compliance100
Maintenance0
Documentation0
vs
0.0
C
Categoryresearch
Stars70,114
Sourcegithub
Security0
Compliance79
Maintenance1
Documentation0

Detailed Metric Comparison

Metric ScienceQA gpt_academic
Trust Score0.0/1000.0/100
GradeDC
Stars20770,114
Categoryresearchresearch
SecurityN/A0
Compliance10079
Maintenance01
Documentation00
EU AI Act Riskminimalminimal
VerifiedNoNo

Verdict

ScienceQA (0.0) and gpt_academic (0.0) have nearly identical trust scores. Both are solid choices. The decision should come down to your specific use case, team preferences, and integration requirements rather than trust differences.

Detailed Analysis

Security

Security scores measure dependency vulnerabilities, CVE exposure, and security practices. ScienceQA scores N/A and gpt_academic scores 0 on this dimension.

Maintenance & Activity

gpt_academic demonstrates stronger maintenance activity (1/100 vs 0/100). This metric captures commit frequency, issue response times, and release cadence. Actively maintained tools receive faster security patches and are less likely to accumulate technical debt.

Documentation

ScienceQA has better documentation (0/100 vs 0/100). Good documentation reduces onboarding time and helps teams adopt the tool safely. This score evaluates README completeness, API documentation, code examples, and tutorial availability.

Community & Adoption

ScienceQA has 207 GitHub stars while gpt_academic has 70,114. gpt_academic has significantly broader community adoption, which typically means more Stack Overflow answers, more third-party tutorials, and faster ecosystem development.

When to Choose Each Tool

Choose ScienceQA if you need:

  • Consider if it better fits your specific use case

Choose gpt_academic if you need:

  • More actively maintained with faster release cadence
  • Larger community (70,114 vs 207 stars)

Switching from ScienceQA to gpt_academic (or vice versa)

When migrating between ScienceQA and gpt_academic, consider these factors:

  1. API Compatibility: ScienceQA (research) and gpt_academic (research) share similar interfaces since they are in the same category.
  2. Security Review: Run a security audit after migration. Check the ScienceQA safety report and gpt_academic safety report for known issues.
  3. Testing: Ensure your test suite covers all integration points before switching in production.
  4. Community Support: ScienceQA has 207 stars and gpt_academic has 70,114. Larger communities typically mean better Stack Overflow answers and migration guides.
ScienceQA Safety Report gpt_academic Safety Report ScienceQA Alternatives gpt_academic Alternatives

Related Pages

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is safer, ScienceQA or gpt_academic?
Based on Nerq's independent trust assessment, ScienceQA has a trust score of 0.0/100 (D) while gpt_academic scores 0.0/100 (C). Both agents are very close in overall trust. Trust scores are based on security, compliance, maintenance, documentation, and community adoption.
How do ScienceQA and gpt_academic compare on security?
ScienceQA has a security score of N/A/100 and gpt_academic scores 0/100. There is a notable difference in their security assessments. ScienceQA's compliance score is 100/100 (EU risk: minimal), while gpt_academic's is 79/100 (EU risk: minimal).
Should I use ScienceQA or gpt_academic?
The choice depends on your requirements. ScienceQA (research, 207 stars) and gpt_academic (research, 70,114 stars) serve similar use cases. On trust, ScienceQA scores 0.0/100 and gpt_academic scores 0.0/100. Review the full KYA reports for each agent before making a decision. Consider factors like integration requirements, documentation quality (0 vs 0), and maintenance activity (0 vs 1).

Related Comparisons

Last updated: 2026-09-20 | Data refreshed weekly
Disclaimer: Nerq trust scores are automated assessments based on publicly available signals. They are not endorsements or guarantees. Always conduct your own due diligence.

We use cookies for analytics and caching. Privacy Policy