资讯

The Two-Ledger Model: Transaction-Grain Cost Accounting for Multi-Agent AI Systems Across Clouds, Models, and Systems of Record

📅 2026-11-06 ⏱️ 约 7 分钟阅读 ✍️ AI导航编辑部 🔗 arxiv.org
The Two-Ledger Model: Transaction-Grain Cost Accounting for Multi-Agent AI Systems Across Clouds, Models, and Systems of Record
📝 内容摘要

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 4 Nov 2026] Title:The Two-Ledger Model: Transaction-Grain

📌 核心要点

  • Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
  • [Submitted on 4 Nov 2026]
  • Current browse context:

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence

[Submitted on 4 Nov 2026]

Title:The Two-Ledger Model: Transaction-Grain Cost Accounting for Multi-Agent AI Systems Across Clouds, Models, and Systems of Record

View PDF HTML (experimental)Abstract:Enterprises run business transactions through multi-agent AI systems spanning clouds, large language models (LLMs), orchestration harnesses, and systems of record. Finance receives AI cost only at settlement grain, aggregated by SKU and charge period. The business question (what did this order, claim, or case cost in AI?) cannot be answered from billing data, because providers never see enterprise transaction boundaries. The FinOps Open Cost and Usage Specification (FOCUS) gives billing data one schema across providers but remains settlement-grain even as it adds AI token and requester attribution. We formalize this grain mismatch, derive seven requirements, and propose the Two-Ledger Model: a settlement ledger of FOCUS-conformant billing data joined to an attribution ledger of invocation-grain usage records built on OpenTelemetry GenAI telemetry. A layered correlation spine (trace context, A2A/MCP metadata, business-key correlation, probabilistic matching) assigns each record to its business transaction with recorded method and confidence; a versioned rate card prices usage in near real time; period reconciliation ties both ledgers to the invoice, and the unexplained residual identifies shadow AI. Costs are reported per order, claim, or outcome with agentic cost metrics. A simulation with known ground truth shows the spine sustaining cost coverage above 99% as trace propagation falls to zero, the reconciliation residual recovering planted unmetered spend within 0.24 percentage points while flagging provider billing errors, and mid-flight gating cutting p99 transaction cost by up to 61% at a 2-4% false-pause rate. We propose the attribution ledger as an invocation-grain FOCUS profile for standardization.

Additional Features

Current browse context:

cs.AI

References & Citations

Loading...

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

来源arxiv.org· 本文为编辑整理,仅供参考