Against the backdrop of rapid advances in generative artificial intelligence (AIGC), university departmental libraries are under urgent pressure to evolve from traditional “resource centers” into “intelligent service hubs.” This paper systematically maps out AIGC-enabled pathways for resource restructuring, service innovation, and management optimization, proposing a transformation framework centered on an intelligent knowledge base, personalized recommender systems, AI-powered chatbots, and automated metadata generation. Through in-depth case studies of MIT’s “AI Librarian,” Peking University’s Smart Discipline Service Platform, and Cambridge’s Digital Humanities Laboratory, the study distills key success factors such as “general-purpose model + domain adaptation,” “human–AI collaboration,” and “interdisciplinary governance.” Building on these insights, the research constructs an AIGC-ILS (Integrated Library System) collaborative ecosystem, a librarian competency transformation system, and a content-review and privacy-protection mechanism across four dimensions —organization, resources, ethics, and evaluation—offering a systematic, replicable roadmap for the intelligent transformation of university knowledge services. 

Liu Xia. Research on the Transformation of Knowledge Services in University Subject Resource Rooms Driven by AIGC. Frontiers in Educational Research (2025), Vol. 8, Issue 10: 86-94. https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2025.081013.

[1] Zhang, H., & Li, X. (2022). Challenges and countermeasures of subject-based reading rooms in Chinese universities. Library Hi Tech, 40(2), 321-335.

[2] Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., et al. (2023). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07258. 

[3] Chen, J., Wang, L., & Liu, Y. (2024). Generative AI for academic knowledge services: A systematic review. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 50(1), 102-115. 

[4] Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Xu, T., et al. (2021). Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 1-15. 

[5] Wang, X., Li, Y., & Zhang, H. (2023). Integrating generative AI into library management systems: Challenges and solutions. Library Hi Tech, 41(2), 210-225. 

[6] Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021). On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big? Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 610-623. 

[7] Zhang, Y., Liu, W., & Chen, R. (2024). The evolving role of academic librarians in the AI era: From information intermediaries to knowledge curators. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 51(1), 88-97.

[8] Tennant, M. R., Ralston, R., & Seda, C. (2023). Reimagining the academic library in the age of AI. College & Research Libraries, 84(3), 45-62. 

[9] Lynch, C. A. (2017). The institutional repository landscape. Journal of Library Administration, 57(4), 353-374. 

[10] Chen, J., & Zhai, S. (2023). Transforming academic library services with generative AI: A case study of Peking University's smart platform. Library Hi Tech, 41(4), 1125-1140. 

[11] Park, J. R., & Oh, S. (2022). Ethical dimensions of generative AI in knowledge organization: A framework for assessment. Journal of Information Science, 48(3), 345-360.

[12] Park, J. R., & Oh, S. (2021). Automatic metadata generation using deep learning. Journal of Documentation, 77(2), 365-382.

[13] Rombach, R., Blattmann, A., Lorenz, D., et al. (2022). High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 10684-10695.

[14] Liu, Y., Wang, Q., & Zhang, L. (2024). Evaluating AI-powered knowledge services in global university libraries: Comparative analysis of MIT, Cambridge and Tsinghua cases. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 50(2), 102-118. 

[15] Noh, Y., Oh, S., & Park, S. (2020). A machine learning-based recommender system for academic libraries. Library Hi Tech, 38(3), 543-558. 

[16] Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.

[17] Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. 

[18] Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5-14.