Triple
T11090144
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Satisfiability Modulo Theories |
E262229
|
entity |
| Predicate | instanceOf |
P0
|
FINISHED |
| Object | automated reasoning technique |
C15969
|
CONCEPT FINISHED |
How this triple was built (1 step)
Every LLM step that produced this triple, in pipeline order — named-entity classification, the disambiguation choices (the exact options shown, with the pick highlighted), and the generated description. The batch + timestamp of each is in the Provenance table below.
CD
Concept disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target class: automated reasoning technique Context triple: [Satisfiability Modulo Theories, instanceOf, automated reasoning technique]
-
A.
automated theorem proving technique
chosen
An automated theorem proving technique is a systematic, algorithmic method used by computer programs to derive logical conclusions and verify the validity of mathematical or logical statements without human intervention.
-
B.
formal verification technique
A formal verification technique is a mathematically rigorous method used to prove or disprove the correctness of a system’s design or implementation with respect to a specified formal specification or property.
-
C.
model checking technique
A model checking technique is a formal verification method that systematically explores all possible states of a system model to automatically determine whether it satisfies specified correctness properties.
-
D.
theorem prover
A theorem prover is a software system or algorithm that automatically or semi-automatically checks the validity of logical statements by deriving conclusions from axioms and inference rules.
-
E.
interactive theorem prover
An interactive theorem prover is a software system that assists users in the formalization and step-by-step verification of mathematical proofs or program properties through human-guided logical reasoning.
- F. None of above.
Provenance (1 batch)
The batch behind each pipeline step, in order, with when it ran. Timestamps are batch-level — stages were processed in waves, so the object chain (NER → NED1 → NEDg → NED2) reads in order, but predicate / elicitation batches can sit in a different wave.
| Step | Stage | Batch ID | Status | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| creating | Elicitation | batch_69d6aa9a40d88190a373e2c7e48285db |
completed | April 8, 2026, 7:20 p.m. |
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:27 p.m.