Triple
T16230248
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Syncerus |
E393957
|
entity |
| Predicate | threatsToMemberSpecies |
P956
|
FINISHED |
| Object | habitat loss |
—
|
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: habitat loss | Statement: [Syncerus, threatsToMemberSpecies, habitat loss]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: threatsToMemberSpecies Context triple: [Syncerus, threatsToMemberSpecies, habitat loss]
-
A.
hasConservationConcernIn
Indicates that an entity is subject to a specified conservation concern status within a particular geographic area or jurisdiction.
-
B.
areEndangeredIn
Indicates that the entities are classified as endangered within a specified geographic area or jurisdiction.
-
C.
threatenedBy
chosen
Indicates that one entity poses a danger or potential harm to another entity.
-
D.
isEndangeredDueTo
Indicates that an entity is endangered as a result of the specific cause or factor represented by the related entity.
-
E.
areEndangeredOrVulnerable
Indicates that the entities are classified as being at risk of extinction, either endangered or vulnerable, according to conservation status criteria.
- 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_69d87f204df88190a8f88923decf9835 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 4:40 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e23d29438c81909aa2724cc47bb959 |
completed | April 17, 2026, 2:01 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e219e94a448190b73a4e6aa374eb4a |
completed | April 17, 2026, 11:30 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 5:03 a.m.