MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410705325 · doi:10.29173/cais1963

Patterns of Chat Users

2025· article· fr· W4410705325 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Guinsly Mondésir, Chelsie Lalonde, Usman Malik, Sherri Sunstrum

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityQueen's UniversityCarleton UniversityUniversity of Guelph-HumberUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This poster explores the behaviors and information needs of repeat users of a virtual reference chat service in Ontario academic libraries. Analyzing 1,419 chat transcripts from 360 unique users in 2022-23, the study examines transaction types, instructional interactions, and signs of library anxiety. Using a mixed-methods approach, researchers identified patterns in repeat users' engagement, highlighting implications for service design, training, and outreach. The poster presents data visualizations, thematic analysis, and recommendations to enhance virtual reference services, ensuring they better support sustained user engagement and address evolving patron needs. Les habitudes des utilisateurs du clavardage: analyser les utilisateurs réguliers d'un service de référence virtuel de niveau consortium RésuméLe service de référence virtuel par clavardage est une partie essentielle du service de référence dans les bibliothèques universitaires, offrant aux étudiants, au personnel et aux professeurs la possibilité d'accéder à une aide à distance lorsqu'ils en ont besoin. Notre équipe de recherche est composée de bibliothécaires et de coordinateurs du service de référence virtuel de plusieurs partenaires du consortium de clavardage du Conseil des bibliothèques universitaires de l'Ontario. Nous avons voulu exploiter les données que nous avions déjà recueillies sur notre plateforme de clavardage afin de mieux comprendre le comportement et les besoins d'information des usagers qui ont utilisé le service à plusieurs reprises au cours de l'année universitaire 2022-2023. Nous avons entrepris une revue de la littérature pour identifier ce qui était déjà connu sur les utilisateurs réguliers du clavardage et avons constaté qu'il s'agissait d'un domaine sous-étudié des services de référence virtuels. Cette affiche présente les premières réflexions d'une analyse de transcription des interactions des utilisateurs réguliers au cours de la période susmentionnée dans 16 établissements universitaires différents de l'Ontario.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.011
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicDigital Communication and LanguageFrench-language works237,207