Triple
T13592852
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Quil |
E324734
|
entity |
| Predicate | certaintyOfExistence |
P36359
|
FINISHED |
| Object | disputed / legendary |
—
|
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: disputed / legendary | Statement: [Quil, certaintyOfExistence, disputed / legendary]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: certaintyOfExistence Context triple: [Quil, certaintyOfExistence, disputed / legendary]
-
A.
hasCertainty
chosen
Indicates that a statement, belief, or relationship is associated with a specific level or degree of confidence or surety.
-
B.
proposesExistenceOf
Indicates that one entity puts forward or suggests that another entity should exist or be brought into existence.
-
C.
concludesExistenceOf
Indicates that one entity determines or infers that another entity exists.
-
D.
ontologicalClaimAbout
Indicates that one entity makes a statement or assertion about the fundamental nature, existence, or categorization of another entity.
-
E.
narrativeCertainty
Indicates the degree of confidence or definitiveness with which a narrative, statement, or account is presented as true or reliable.
- 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_69d80769eaf081909d82f44e484d6113 |
completed | April 9, 2026, 8:09 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69dbb056ce088190a6feb4266633d18b |
completed | April 12, 2026, 2:46 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69dbae18eaf48190809e8b365856cde9 |
completed | April 12, 2026, 2:37 p.m. |
Created at: April 9, 2026, 9:49 p.m.