Back to Selected Work

Project 02

15,000 Questions

An analysis of historical BI Copilot conversations to improve intent handling, repeated-question processing, caching, routing, and role-aware responses.

  • COMPLETED CONTRIBUTION
  • CONFIDENTIAL CONTEXT
Category
Analytics / GenAI / Business Intelligence
Role
Computer Vision Intern
Maturity
Completed contribution
Year
2026

30-second proof

What this proves

Problem
Business users expressed similar analytical needs through many different question formats, creating repeated intents and failure patterns.
Operational or business context
Internal BI Copilot and Snowflake-based business analytics environment.
My contribution
I analyzed historical conversations, identified intent and failure patterns, and contributed to prompt, caching, routing, and semantic-view improvements.
Constraints
Confidential conversations · Role-dependent business questions · Repeated user intents · Proprietary prompts and internal schemas
Project maturity
Completed contribution
Contextual technical stack
Snowflake · SQL · Snowflake Cortex · Intent analysis
~15,000historical conversations analyzed

Measurement noteThe portfolio must not show real conversations, proprietary prompts, semantic-view structures, or internal datasets.

Ownership

Contributed to

  • I contributed to intent, prompt, caching, routing, and semantic-view improvements.

Collaborative context

  • Internal BI Copilot and business analytics context.

Existing environment

  • Snowflake-based internal business analytics environment.

Not shown publicly

  • Real conversations, proprietary prompts, semantic-view structures, and internal datasets are not shown.
Overview

Overview

An analysis of historical BI Copilot conversations to improve intent handling, repeated-question processing, caching, routing, and role-aware responses.

The problem

The problem

Similar business questions can arrive with different wording, roles, and context, which complicates reliable response handling.

Context

Context

The work used confidential historical business-intelligence conversations and must not expose internal data.

My role

My role

I worked on this project as a Computer Vision Intern.

What I built

What I built

I analyzed conversation patterns and contributed to improvements in intent handling, repeated-question processing, caching, routing, and role-aware responses.

How it works

How it works

Historical questions were reviewed to identify repeated needs, routing patterns, and response-handling improvements.

  1. Historical conversations
  2. Intent patterns
  3. Failure analysis
  4. Routing improvements
  5. Better responses

Decisions

  • I analyzed historical behavior before proposing changes.
  • I grouped repeated intents and failure patterns.
  • I separated role-aware business needs rather than treating every question identically.
Evidence and results

Evidence and results

The verified evidence is limited to the scale of historical conversations analyzed.

The result should be read as a contribution to identifying repeated intents and failure patterns, not as a public claim about internal model performance.

The portfolio must not show real conversations, proprietary prompts, semantic-view structures, or internal datasets.

Challenges and limitations

Challenges and limitations

Internal conversations, semantic views, proprietary prompts, datasets, and query structures cannot be shown.

Internal conversations, semantic views, proprietary prompts, datasets, and query structures are not shown.

What I would improve next

What I would improve next

I would add sanitized examples of repeated question patterns if they are approved for public use.

Related work