MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061263043 · doi:10.1300/j136v07n03_03

Internet Reference Services and the Reference Desk: Does the Nature of a User's Query Really Change?

2002· article· en· W2061263043 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Reference Services Quarterly · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReference deskThe InternetWorld Wide WebTheme (computing)Computer scienceDeskPerspective (graphical)Information retrievalLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This paper reviews the nature of queries posed by library patrons during a regular reference interview, within the conceptual framework of Internet reference services in an academic library. The users of the reference desk in a typical university setting usually range from the freshmen to the faculty, with researchers from the corporate sector occasionally dropping in. Presented here will be the viewpoint of a reference librarian indicating that library users, armed with the newly acquired knowledge of Internet/electronic tools, leave the reference desk with a vastly different perspective on carrying out a literature search than they arrived with. The observation is that while the basic theme and nature of queries remain pretty much the same, it is the role of the reference librarian in responding to these queries that has undergone an immense change.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.008
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it