Production machine-learning models are derived artifacts of time-bounded training snapshots: a deployed model is a materialized view over a training cut that ages the instant it is built.
A common response is to replace the fixed retraining cadence with an adaptive trigger -- a weighted staleness score that retrains when accumulated source risk crosses a threshold.
We show this is the wrong lever, and identify the right one.
First, an equivalence limit:
Any refresh trigger that is a static, strictly monotone function of a single shared global training-data age is operationally equivalent to a calibrated uniform age timer, so a global staleness budget, however elaborately it weights segments, sources, and sensitivities, carries no scheduling information a clock does not.
The limit also shows how to escape it: refresh segments differentially, giving each its own age and refresh interval, which is meaningful when refresh cost is separable across segments (incremental training or per-segment models).
We solve the resulting budget-allocation problem.
In the frequent-refresh regime each segment's optimal refresh rate is proportional to the square root of its risk $w_j λ_j$ (weight times change rate), and the optimal policy never costs more than the uniform timer, beating it by a closed-form Cauchy-Schwarz "price of uniformity" that is zero for homogeneous workloads and grows with heterogeneity.
In a discrete-event simulation with real Poisson change events, the optimal policy lowers realized weighted stale exposure by 8-29% relative to the uniform timer at matched refresh budget, winning on 86-100% of seeds; a naive exposure-threshold policy does not, showing the allocation is what helps; and the advantage survives 50% rate-estimation noise.