EVALUATING HUMAN-AI TASK ALLOCATION FEASIBILITY UNDER BUNDLED PAYMENTS: A RISK-ADJUSTED CORRIDOR SIMULATION FRAMEWORK FOR HEALTHCARE PARTNERSHIPS

Author(s)

Anil Kemisetti, MBA, MS;
UC Berkeley, Cupertino, CA, USA
OBJECTIVES: To develop an integrated simulation framework that formalizes a previously unaddressed question: under what conditions does AI-enabled cost reduction create viable healthcare partnership corridors under bundled payments?
METHODS: The framework integrates three components.
First, constant elasticity of substitution (CES) production functions model human-AI labor substitution in non-surgical workflows, with elasticity parameter σ governing substitutability.
Second, Monte Carlo simulation estimates cost distributions for specified AI share levels, incorporating labor savings, AI operating costs, supervision requirements, and potential error-related costs, recognizing that AI may increase rather than decrease total costs in some configurations.
Third, risk-adjusted corridor bounds determine feasibility: Floor = E[C(s)] + λ·CVaRα[C(s)] + πmin must fall below Ceiling = B − πH − χ, where s is AI share, λ is risk aversion, α is CVaR confidence level, and π terms represent profit requirements.
The framework accepts scenario inputs and outputs corridor feasibility across the AI share spectrum.
RESULTS: Framework demonstration revealed three behavioral patterns.
First, AI share affects both expected cost and variance through competing mechanisms; automation reduces labor costs, while supervision and error risk can increase costs, with the net effect determining corridor viability.
Second, corridor feasibility exhibits threshold behavior: below scenario-specific minimum AI share, no feasible corridor exists; above scenario-specific maximum, oversight costs eliminate corridors.
Third, preliminary sensitivity analysis suggests corridor width is most sensitive to cost variance and risk aversion (λ), moderately sensitive to substitution elasticity (σ). Across tested scenarios, feasibility thresholds ranged from 35% to 60% AI share, with some high-oversight scenarios showing no feasible AI configuration.
CONCLUSIONS: The framework provides a diagnostic methodology for assessing whether AI capabilities create or destroy viable partnership conditions. By revealing scenarios where AI narrows or eliminates corridors, it offers hospitals a rigorous approach for evaluating AI tools against organization-specific feasibility requirements.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6

Code

EE93

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Budget Impact Analysis, Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies, Thresholds & Opportunity Cost

Disease

No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×