Back to Telecom Hub
Revenue & Trust

Revenue leakage & assurance

One of many revenue-and-trust use cases. This example runs full-population reconciliation across mediation, rating, and billing, explains every discrepancy, and hands finance a reviewed export to correct.

Proves these Lumina features

The Reasoning LayerSeparation of LogicThe BoardroomLumina Cortex

Leakage hides in the seams

Operators lose an estimated 3 to 10% of revenue to leakage: billing errors, reconciliation gaps, and usage that is rated but never billed. Across the industry that is on the order of a hundred billion dollars a year.

Large operators process more than a billion call-detail records a day. Rule-based assurance samples, so it misses new leakage patterns, and discrepancies hide in the seams between usage, rating, provisioning, and the ledger for weeks before anyone notices.

3-10%
Of revenue lost to leakage industry-wide
1B+
Call-detail records processed per day at scale
Weeks
Typical lag before a discrepancy is caught

Why your current tools can't fix this

Traditional approaches were not built for the scale and complexity of modern operations.

01

Reconciliation is sampled and reactive

Rule-based RA checks a sample after the fact. Leakage that does not match an existing rule, or that lives between two systems, never gets flagged.

02

The seams are where money disappears

Usage, rating, provisioning, and the ledger are separate systems. Leakage hides in the joins, exactly where no single system is looking.

03

Rules are frozen, plans are not

Every new bundle, promotion, and partner settlement creates a new leakage surface. The rules ship slower than the products do.

04

Findings aren't explainable to audit

A flagged discrepancy with no traceable reasoning cannot survive a finance or regulatory review. Auditors need the why, not just the what.

The Lumina Approach

How Lumina solves it

Three layers of intelligence working together: reasoning agents, proactive detection, and multi-agent deliberation.

Layer 1

Full-population reconciliation

Agents reconcile across mediation, rating, and billing on the full population, not a sample, and explain each discrepancy in plain language with the query behind it. Your rating rules stay outside the model, owned and auditable, through Separation of Logic.

Every calculation is SQL you can verify. No black box.

Agent Reasoning
SQL-Backed
Agent Reasoning:

Reconciling 1.24B CDRs against rated + billed records (cycle 2026-05)... Matched: 1,238,902,144 Rated but never billed: 41,209 events, ~$182,400 Provisioned but never rated: 3,118 sessions, ~$54,900 → Root: roaming partner P-DE bundle mapped to a retired rate plan → Each case carries its source rows and the rule that should have applied

All outputs backed by verifiable SQL you can inspect
The Radar
Scanning
Anomaly Detected:

ANOMALY: New bundle 'Unlimited-5G-EU' shows usage up 220% but rated revenue flat Benford analysis on rated amounts deviates (p=0.002) → Likely rating gap on the new bundle. Flagged in cycle 1, not cycle 5.

Proactive hypothesis testing, like anomaly clustering
Layer 2

Spot the new leak early

The Radar scans every cycle for emerging leakage signatures: a new plan whose usage and revenue diverge, a settlement that drifts, a provisioning path with no rating record. It surfaces the leak in the first cycle, not the fifth.

The Radar surfaces issues the operator didn't know to look for. Before they become incidents.

Layer 3

Governed correction, not write-back

Revenue-assurance, finance, and provisioning agents deliberate on each leakage cluster and produce a reviewed correction package. The output is a governed export of flagged cases for human-approved correction. Lumina never writes back to the billing system of record.

The output is grounded in facts (SQL results), not hallucination. Every recommendation carries a full audit trail.

The Boardroom
Deliberation
Multi-Agent Debate:

RA Agent: 41,209 rated-but-unbilled events on partner P-DE, recommend rebill Finance Agent: rebill window is 60 days, 2,140 events are out of window Provisioning Agent: root is a retired rate-plan mapping, fix the mapping or it recurs → Export: 39,069 in-window cases for approval + 1 mapping correction ticket. Human signs off before any change.

Agents vote, challenge, and produce a synthesized recommendation

The result: intelligence that scales

Lumina addresses the four strategic problems that hold operators back.

Scale without headcount

Reconcile the full CDR population every cycle instead of a sample, across every billing seam, without adding analysts.

Reduce reactive costs

Recover leakage in the cycle it happens, not weeks later. On a 3 to 10% leakage base, early detection is direct margin.

Knowledge retention

Cortex remembers every leakage pattern and root cause, so the same plan-mapping gap is caught instantly the next time it appears.

Auditable trust

Every discrepancy carries its source rows and the rule that should have applied. Findings are a governed export for human approval, audit-ready by construction.

Agents for this use case

Specialized AI agents that power this workflow.

Lumi-Ledger

Revenue Assurance Analyst

Reconciles mediation, rating, and billing on the full population and explains each discrepancy.

Lumi-Aegis

Fraud & Leakage Reasoner

Separates deliberate fraud from process leakage so each case routes to the right team.

Lumi-Sovereign

Sovereignty & Custody

Keeps billing and CDR data inside your environment while the reconciliation runs.

This is just one of many use cases

Explore what Lumina can do for your operation

Revenue leakage & assurance is one example of how Lumina reasons on operational data. Across Telecom, every domain has use cases where AI agents can add value.

Not ready to commit? Stay up to date as we release new capabilities and industry-specific agents.

View all Telecom use cases