NORDLITH RESEARCH

Whole-Workflow Cost and Quality Worksheet

Practical companion protocol. Examples and proposed controls retain their stated evidence limits.

Read the research paper · Browse all research

Contents
  1. 1. Measurement contract
  2. 2. Per-task event ledger
  3. 3. Cost roll-up
  4. 4. Comparison table
  5. 5. Synthetic worked example
  6. 6. Release decision protocol
  7. 7. Audit checklist

Status: reusable proposed protocol; the worked numbers are synthetic and are not Nordlith operating results.

1. Measurement contract

Complete this before running either arm.

Field Required entry
Decision What architecture or routing decision will this study inform?
Baseline Exact version, models, tools and orchestration configuration
Candidate Exact version, models, tools and orchestration configuration
Task population Fixed fixture set or sampling frame; difficulty/consequence strata
Admission event First event included in the accounting boundary
Outcome unit Delivered object or authoritative state being accepted
Acceptance contract Checks, rubric, prohibited failures and sign-off
Observation horizon Period for delayed repair, reversal and incident attribution
Cache condition Cold/warm/mixed; provider billing treatment
Price basis Invoice, current list price or fixed normalised price
Human-time rule Roles, active-minute method and loaded hourly rates
One-time allocation Unamortised build cost, expected volume and amortisation period
Exclusion rule Predeclared reasons a trial may be invalidated
Stop rule Safety, quality or budget condition that halts the candidate

2. Per-task event ledger

Use one row per event. Preserve rejected and superseded attempts.

task_id event_id parent_event arm attempt event_class component/version start end input units cached input output units direct charge active human min terminal state evidence ref
T-001 E-001 — baseline 1 admission fixture-v1 … … 0 0 0 0 2 — contract/T-001

Allowed event_class values: preparation, routing, model, tool, coordination, validation, review, repair, rollback, operations, terminal.

Allowed terminal states: accepted, rejected, abandoned, timed_out, authority_blocked, invalid_trial.

Rules:

  1. A provider acknowledgement is an event, not an accepted outcome.
  2. Cached input is recorded separately and monetised only under the provider’s verified rule.
  3. Model judges are recorded as model events and validation events.
  4. Human waiting time is not active labour unless the declared policy says otherwise.
  5. Every admitted task reaches exactly one terminal state.

3. Cost roll-up

For each arm, calculate:

C_total = build_amortised
        + model
        + tools
        + coordination
        + review
        + retry_and_repair
        + failure
        + operations

accepted_yield = N_accepted / N_admitted
cost_per_accepted_outcome = C_total / N_accepted

Do not calculate cost_per_accepted_outcome when N_accepted = 0; report it as undefined.

Keep these measures beside the cost result:

  • acceptance score or pass rate under the frozen rubric;
  • prohibited-failure count and severity;
  • median and tail time to accepted outcome;
  • retries per admitted task;
  • reviewer minutes per accepted outcome;
  • model/tool event counts per accepted outcome;
  • invalid-trial count with reasons;
  • task-stratum results.

4. Comparison table

Measure Baseline Candidate Difference Interpretation
Admitted tasks Same population?
Accepted outcomes Same contract?
Accepted yield
Direct model cost Includes all agents/judges?
Tool cost
Coordination cost Human + metered automation
Review cost
Retry/repair cost Includes failed attempts
Failure cost Within horizon
Operations cost
Amortised build cost Show unamortised total separately
Total cost
Cost per accepted outcome Primary economic comparison
Median / p95 time to acceptance Keep time in native units
Prohibited failures Gate, not a discountable cost

5. Synthetic worked example

Assume both arms process 100 matched tasks under the same acceptance contract. Dollar values below are illustrative and already include the declared human-time conversion. The figures were arithmetically checked; they are not observed results.

Cost category Baseline Candidate
Model $42 $18
Tools $8 $12
Coordination $120 $200
Review $360 $540
Retry/repair and failure $90 $120
Amortised build $100 $150
Total $720 $1,040
Accepted outcomes 90 92
Cost per accepted outcome $8.00 $11.30

Calculation:

baseline = 720 / 90 = $8.00 per accepted outcome
candidate = 1040 / 92 = $11.304347... ≈ $11.30
relative difference = (11.304347 / 8.00) - 1 ≈ 41.3% higher

Interpretation: the candidate reduces direct model cost by $24 and accepts two additional tasks, but its extra coordination and review make its cost per accepted outcome about 41.3% higher in this synthetic case. This does not prove the architecture is inferior. The two extra accepted outcomes may be important, the review process may improve with learning, or severe failures may differ. It does prove that the phrase “cheaper model” cannot settle the workflow comparison.

6. Release decision protocol

  1. Check comparability. Reject the comparison if task populations or acceptance contracts materially differ without stratification.
  2. Apply hard gates. Do not advance a candidate with prohibited authority, privacy, safety or integrity failures.
  3. Check quality. If the candidate misses the declared acceptance threshold, report the economic result but do not call it a qualifying saving.
  4. Compare qualifying arms. Use cost per accepted outcome, accepted yield, latency and failure distribution.
  5. Inspect transfers. Identify whether model savings moved into preparation, coordination, review or repair.
  6. Stress-test assumptions. Recalculate with plausible human-rate, volume and amortisation scenarios.
  7. Record the decision. State the chosen configuration, workload, date, evidence and conditions for remeasurement.

7. Audit checklist

  • [ ] Every admitted task has one terminal state.
  • [ ] Failed and superseded attempts remain in the ledger.
  • [ ] Coordinator, worker and evaluator calls are all counted.
  • [ ] Cache-inclusive tokens are not mistaken for billed tokens.
  • [ ] Direct charges are distinguished from estimated prices.
  • [ ] Human active time is distinguished from elapsed time.
  • [ ] One-time costs and their amortisation rule are visible.
  • [ ] Acceptance criteria were fixed before results were inspected.
  • [ ] Quality and severe failures are reported beside cost.
  • [ ] Model, tool, prompt, routing and infrastructure versions are recorded.
  • [ ] Results are stratified where task difficulty or consequence differs.
  • [ ] Claims are limited to the measured configuration and observation horizon.

Continue reading