AI Model Bidding for Cost-Aware Response Routing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing AI model applications for generating responses, such as ChatGPT, require significant computational resources and energy, leading to high costs without efficient load distribution or fee comparison mechanisms, necessitating an improved method for resource allocation and user selection.

Innovation Solution

A method and system for providing responses using a bidding process that involves receiving client requests, determining client identity, transmitting request information to multiple systems, receiving cost information, transmitting cost indications, generating responses based on selected costs, and allocating payments based on client identity, with optional micropayments and feedback incentives.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If AI model applications use massive calculation power for sophisticated answers, then response quality improves, but energy consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresponse qualityVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the AI service market into multiple competing systems, each handling a portion of the workload. By dividing the total demand across several systems rather than concentrating all requests on a single massive computational system, the patent reduces overall energy consumption while maintaining response quality through competitive selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameter of resource allocation from centralized to distributed. Instead of allocating all computational resources to one system, the patent dynamically allocates requests across multiple systems based on their bid prices, effectively changing how computational parameters are distributed to optimize the quality-energy ratio.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Adaptability or versatility

If multiple AI systems provide services, then user selection and cost comparison improve, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveuser selection capabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces a mediator system (the auction/platform system) that manages the complexity of coordinating multiple AI systems. This intermediary handles the bid collection, evaluation, and request routing, allowing users to benefit from multiple system options without directly managing the complexity of integrating and coordinating them.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms where systems bid based on their cost parameters, and users receive feedback through cost indications and selected system notifications. This feedback loop simplifies the user experience by automatically handling selection based on predefined criteria while maintaining the benefits of multiple system options.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Productivity

If AI systems are monetarized with fees, then resource allocation efficiency improves, but user accessibility decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveresource allocation efficiencyVSAvoiduser accessibility
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements self-service through automated bid evaluation and selection. The system automatically processes multiple bids, evaluates them according to predefined criteria, and selects the optimal system without requiring manual user intervention. This maintains resource allocation efficiency while preserving ease of operation for users.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent provides feedback to users through cost indications that show pricing information from different systems. This feedback mechanism allows users to understand the economic implications of their requests while the automated selection process maintains accessibility. Users receive transparent pricing information without being burdened by complex selection processes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS20260073372A1Method and system for ai-model application bidding for providing a response to a clent request
Publication Date: 2026.03.12 SUPERTAB AG
  • US20260073372A1 patent drawing
  • US20260073372A1 patent drawing
  • US20260073372A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A computer-implemented method provides a response to a client request by receiving the request from a client device; determining a client identity issuing the request; transmitting information indicative of the request to a plurality of AI systems executing respective trained AI model applications; receiving from the AI systems, respective cost information for generating a response; transmitting a cost indication to the client device; processing an authorisation signal from the client device selecting a cost indication for generating a response; transmitting to the system associated with the selected cost indication, instructions to generate the response; receiving a generated response; transmitting the generated response to the client device; allocating the cost indication for the transmission of the response to client account based on the client identity; monitoring a total allocated amount to the client account; and request payment when the total allocated amount exceeds a predetermined threshold amount or period of time.