Triple
T14439064
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | JavaCC |
E358039
|
entity |
| Predicate | supportsGrammarNotation |
P95660
|
FINISHED |
| Object | EBNF-like syntax |
—
|
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: EBNF-like syntax | Statement: [JavaCC, supportsGrammarNotation, EBNF-like syntax]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: supportsGrammarNotation Context triple: [JavaCC, supportsGrammarNotation, EBNF-like syntax]
-
A.
hasGrammar
Indicates that an entity possesses, follows, or is associated with a particular system of grammatical rules or structure.
-
B.
hasDocumentedGrammars
Indicates that there exist written or otherwise formally recorded grammars describing the linguistic structure of the subject language or linguistic system.
-
C.
usesNotationFor
chosen
Indicates that one entity employs or adopts a particular notation system or symbolic representation for another entity.
-
D.
hasStandardizedGrammar
Indicates that a language or notation follows an officially defined and consistently applied set of grammatical rules.
-
E.
hasKnownGrammar
Indicates that an entity is associated with a grammar whose structure and rules are already defined or understood.
- 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_69d8279402a88190821ffa39ae15bccf |
completed | April 9, 2026, 10:26 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69de914a45ec81909ab8ccf302047d7f |
completed | April 14, 2026, 7:11 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69de5c3a02fc819097373f97a260cdeb |
completed | April 14, 2026, 3:24 p.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 1:18 a.m.