Demonstrates cost estimation in AI training data projects, suggesting an interpretable machine learning framework.
This study proposes an explainable machine learning framework for estimating the total project cost (TPC) of AI training-data construction, where cost information is difficult to structure due to heterogeneous workflows and quality requirements. Using 386 public AI training-data projects conducted between 2020 and 2022, we derive 24 numerical predictors from standardized final reports and construct three input tracks: a baseline feature set, a principal component analysis (PCA)-enhanced set, and a factor analysis (FA)–enhanced set capturing latent cost structures. Four regression models (Ridge, Random Forest, XGBoost, and LightGBM) are evaluated using nested cross-validation. XGBoost achieves the best overall performance across all three tracks (Baseline, PCA-enhanced, and FA-enhanced). Among them, PCA-enhanced XGBoost attains the highest predictive accuracy (R2 = 0.868; RMSE = 1084.9; MAE = 746.9; MAPE = 0.358; pooled out-of-fold), while Baseline XGBoost yields the lowest MAE (731.4; R2 = 0.863). To support transparent decision-making, Shapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP)-based attribution and scenario-based sensitivity analyses are conducted. Results show that project scale and process-level unit costs are dominant cost-drivers, while cloud usage, expert participation, and de-identification requirements exhibit secondary effects. The proposed framework provides an interpretable, data-driven approach to cost information management and decision support for data-intensive AI projects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ko et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: