AI Usage Metering
How should AI inference consumption be measured and normalized into usable evidence?
aiusagemetering.com§1 — Measure usage
Begin with explicit consumption evidence.
Identify the units, scope, timing, source, and limitations of AI usage evidence without treating measurement as billing or cost allocation.
§2 — Relate cost
Make cost scope and attribution assumptions visible.
Distinguish provider charges, direct cost, shared cost, and internal accountability before comparing economic views.
§3 — Structure price
Separate commercial price from usage and internal cost.
Define customer-facing units and service conditions without claiming a universal pricing standard or disclosing proprietary rate logic.
§4 — Evaluate revenue
Assess commercial performance within an accounting boundary.
Compare monetization, cost-to-serve, and margin while reserving formal revenue recognition for applicable accounting requirements and qualified judgment.
Published Capability Crosswalkactive Capability Namespace active Capability Namespace active Capability Namespace active Capability Namespace
4 active peers, each addressing one evaluation question.
Inference Revenue
How should an organization evaluate the commercial performance of AI inference offerings?
inferencerevenue.comModel Cost Allocation
How should direct and shared AI-related costs be related to accountable economic objects?
modelcostallocation.comUsage-Based AI Pricing
How can the commercial price of an AI-enabled service relate to measurable usage and service conditions?
usagebasedaipricing.comFAQ — Buyer Orientation
Frequently asked questions.
Is this package a billing or metering platform?
No. It is an implementation-neutral public reference that defines and relates four economic capabilities without providing operational machinery.
Are the four capability namespaces hierarchical?
No. They are peers. Their economic chain describes related questions, not a mandatory implementation order or maturity ranking.
Does FOCUS define AI pricing?
No. FOCUS is an open cost-and-usage specification for technology billing datasets; it does not prescribe a universal AI pricing model.
Does Inference Revenue provide accounting guidance?
No. ASC 606 and IFRS 15 are cited only to mark the formal revenue-recognition boundary. LJP is not an accounting authority.
What is available for evaluation?
The definitions, peer relationships, authority context, credibility boundaries, buyer walkthrough, and machine-readable public resources are available for controlled evaluation.
Credibility Boundaries
Publish the map, not the machine.
Publish the map, not the machine. This package discloses definitions, relationships, authority context, and public resources only. It does not disclose proprietary event schemas, reconciliation logic, allocation formulas, rate models, pricing algorithms, billing workflows, settlement mechanics, accounting judgments, or diligence-only evidence. LJP is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FinOps Foundation, the FOCUS Project, FASB, the IFRS Foundation, or any other external authority. LJP is not an accounting authority; ASC 606 and IFRS 15 remain outside the package as accounting boundaries.
The 5 published destinations provide public orientation; qualified diligence and controlled follow-on work remain separately scoped.