Triple
T15325457
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | King David Hotel bombing |
E366396
|
entity |
| Predicate | warningDispute |
P107087
|
FINISHED |
| Object | British authorities disputed the adequacy of the warnings |
—
|
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: British authorities disputed the adequacy of the warnings | Statement: [King David Hotel bombing, warningDispute, British authorities disputed the adequacy of the warnings]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: warningDispute Context triple: [King David Hotel bombing, warningDispute, British authorities disputed the adequacy of the warnings]
-
A.
disputeIssue
chosen
Indicates that there is a disagreement or conflict specifically concerning a particular issue or point of contention.
-
B.
statusDisputedBy
Indicates that the validity, accuracy, or recognition of a status is being challenged or contested by a specified party.
-
C.
warningSubject
Indicates that one entity is the topic or focus of a warning issued by another entity.
-
D.
warningIssued
Indicates that a formal warning or alert has been communicated from one entity to another regarding a potential or existing risk, problem, or violation.
-
E.
rewardDispute
Indicates a situation where the appropriateness, amount, or conditions of a reward are contested or challenged between parties.
- 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_69d85a121520819093dcce999fdefe1a |
completed | April 10, 2026, 2:01 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e03dfd8f048190831b463a2728eafe |
completed | April 16, 2026, 1:40 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69deca9659f48190b8661df223ce5078 |
completed | April 14, 2026, 11:15 p.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 3:16 a.m.