Triple
T11970115
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Tallapoosa River |
E284894
|
entity |
| Predicate | stateBorderRelation |
P80398
|
FINISHED |
| Object | flows near Alabama–Georgia border |
—
|
LITERAL FINISHED |
How this triple was built (2 steps)
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.
NER
Named-entity recognition
gpt-5-mini
Instruction
Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).
Input
Phrase: flows near Alabama–Georgia border | Statement: [Tallapoosa River, stateBorderRelation, flows near Alabama–Georgia border]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: stateBorderRelation Context triple: [Tallapoosa River, stateBorderRelation, flows near Alabama–Georgia border]
-
A.
provinceBordering
Indicates that two provinces share a common boundary or border with each other.
-
B.
borderStateOf
chosen
Indicates that one state shares a common boundary or border with another state.
-
C.
memberStatesShareBorderAlong
Indicates that two member states have a common boundary running along a specified geographic feature or segment.
-
D.
borderingStateOrTerritory
Indicates that one state or territory shares a common boundary with another state or territory.
-
E.
hasBorderWithNonSovereignEntity
Indicates that one entity shares a land or maritime border with a political or territorial unit that is not fully sovereign.
- F. None of above.
Provenance (3 batches)
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_69d6ab2eaeb881909f7914758f859413 |
completed | April 8, 2026, 7:23 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69d9037bee54819085242a3ef3e286f9 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 2:04 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69d8bb40f30c8190a0e0719bd67542bf |
completed | April 10, 2026, 8:56 a.m. |
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:46 p.m.