aiqbench analysis
As AI system complexity grows, single-run efficiency metrics are becoming insufficient for assessing true environmental impact. This position paper argues that researchers and developers must adopt full life cycle assessments to account for embodied hardware costs alongside operational training and inference expenses. Such comprehensive accounting is essential for accurately evaluating the barriers to scaling sustainable AI infrastructure.
Evaluation of ML Resource Utilization Requires Model Life Cycle Assessment
arXiv:2606.07632v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Proper accounting of the energy requirements and environmental impact of artificial intelligence (AI) systems is necessary for researchers, developers, policy makers, and users to assess the barriers to building systems at scale. With the growing complexity of pipelines and underlying infrastructure needed to develop and deploy AI systems, previous approaches for evaluating AI efficiency which focus on the costs of a single training run or an individual inference prediction are no longer sufficient. In this position paper, we enunciate the need for applying life cycle assessment to evaluate the costs of the machine learning model development and deployment pipeline to properly account for the required resources and downstream impact. Life cycle assessments enable the incorporation of costs across the full life cycle of an AI system and its underlying infrastructure, from the embodied costs associated with the physical computing hardware through the operational costs in training and inference.
Abstract:Proper accounting of the energy requirements and environmental impact of artificial intelligence (AI) systems is necessary for researchers, developers, policy makers, and users to assess the barriers to building systems at scale. With the growing complexity of pipelines and underlying infrastructure needed to develop and deploy AI systems, previous approaches for evaluating AI efficiency which focus on the costs of a single training run or an individual inference prediction are no longer sufficient. In this position paper, we enunciate the need for applying life cycle assessment to evaluate the costs of the machine learning model development and deployment pipeline to properly account for the required resources and downstream impact. Life cycle assessments enable the incorporation of costs across the full life cycle of an AI system and its underlying infrastructure, from the embodied costs associated with the physical computing hardware through the operational costs in training and inference.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2606.07632 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2606.07632v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.07632 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 242 words
Related coverage

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jun 7, 2026

Digital States 2026: AI Moves From Experiment to Infrastructure
govtech.com · Sep 24, 2026
Links #3: 2026/06 Part 1
LessWrong · Jun 15, 2026

Vertical Advantage: Transforming Industries with Lakebase and Agentic AI
Databricks · Aug 27, 2026