PhyAgentOS-core vs PhyAgentOS
The two are close in size: 2.1k stars for PhyAgentOS-core, 2.1k for PhyAgentOS. Over the days we have tracked them PhyAgentOS-core moved +18.8% and PhyAgentOS +114.9%, so PhyAgentOS is growing faster right now.
Neither one leads on the six capability axes, so the choice comes down to which of them fits the way you already work.
Stars and commit dates come from our own daily tracking. The six axes are read off each project's documentation by our review pipeline, so they describe what a project says about itself, not what we measured in its code.
Where they stand today
Decouples cognition from physical hardware with a session-centered runtime and small target adapters so the same agent codebase runs across sim and real robots.
- Stars
- 2.1k
- Tracked growth
- +18.8%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 4h ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Free, self-hosted (local compute)
Decouples cognition from physical hardware with a session-centered runtime and adapter/bridge architecture that lets the same sessions run unchanged across simulation and real robots while enforcing multi-layer safety and auditable execution.
- Stars
- 2.1k
- Tracked growth
- +114.9%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 4h ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Free, self-hosted
Six axes, head to head
Each axis runs 0 to 5. The label under a score is what that project's own docs claim, not a category average.
| Axis | PhyAgentOS-core | PhyAgentOS |
|---|---|---|
Context depth How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository. | ●●●●● Workspace-wide protocol | ●●●●● Workspace & protocols |
Noise control How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only. | ●●●●● Multi-layer safety | ●●●●● Multi-layer validation |
Customization How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config. | ●●●●● Plugins + YAML configs | ●●●●● Extensive configs & plugins |
Privacy Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only. | ●●●●● Fully self-hosted | ●●●●● Self-hostable |
Model freedom Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one. | ●●●●● Specific policy endpoints | ●●●●● OpenPI-focused |
Setup ease What it takes to get a first useful run out of it. | ●●●●● Quick CLI onboarding | ●●●●● 5-minute quickstart |
Which one to pick
Pick PhyAgentOS-core if…
Safety-first — built-in multi-layer validation (critic → preflight → target-side SafetyGuard) and auditable file protocols make it suitable for real-robot deployment.
Pick PhyAgentOS if…
Hardware-agnostic — one codebase to run identical sessions across sim and real robots with small target adapters, built-in safety layers, and auditable state/action logs.
What people want from each one
PhyAgentOS/PhyAgentOS-core
PhyAgentOS/PhyAgentOS
Questions people ask
Is PhyAgentOS-core better than PhyAgentOS?
Neither one leads on the six capability axes, so the choice comes down to which of them fits the way you already work. PhyAgentOS-core is worth picking when safety-first — built-in multi-layer validation (critic → preflight → target-side SafetyGuard) and auditable file protocols make it suitable for real-robot deployment.
Which of PhyAgentOS-core and PhyAgentOS keeps my code private?
PhyAgentOS-core: Fully self-hosted (5/5). PhyAgentOS: Self-hostable (4/5).
What does each one cost to run?
PhyAgentOS-core: Free, self-hosted (local compute). PhyAgentOS: Free, self-hosted.
Full profiles: PhyAgentOS/PhyAgentOS-core and PhyAgentOS/PhyAgentOS. Everything else in Robotics & embodied.