Triple
T15470230
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Sasti |
E372139
|
entity |
| Predicate | languageFamily |
P1047
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Hokan (proposed) |
E315773
|
NE 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: Hokan (proposed) | Statement: [Sasti, languageFamily, Hokan (proposed)]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Hokan (proposed) Context triple: [Sasti, languageFamily, Hokan (proposed)]
-
A.
Hokan (proposed)
chosen
Hokan (proposed) is a hypothesized but controversial language family grouping several indigenous languages of the western United States and Mexico based on suggested historical relationships.
-
B.
Orokam
Orokam is a dialect of the Idoma language spoken by a subgroup of the Idoma people in central Nigeria.
-
C.
Dakelh
Dakelh is an Athabaskan Indigenous people of central British Columbia, Canada, with a distinct culture, history, and language.
-
D.
Hupa
Hupa is a Native American language of northern California traditionally spoken by the Hupa people along the Trinity River.
-
E.
Hokan hypothesis
The Hokan hypothesis is a proposed linguistic grouping that suggests several Native American language families of western North America may share a common ancestral origin.
- F. None of above.
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
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_69d85cc8bd308190886949510b42e764 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 2:13 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e03f6b49788190b270fdfe92646842 |
completed | April 16, 2026, 1:46 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69ff3657972481909219bc040f674c02 |
completed | May 9, 2026, 1:27 p.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 3:33 a.m.