Triple
T18158097
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Merkle–Hellman knapsack cryptosystem |
E434684
|
entity |
| Predicate | consideredSecure |
P130693
|
FINISHED |
| Object | false |
—
|
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: false | Statement: [Merkle–Hellman knapsack cryptosystem, consideredSecure, false]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: consideredSecure Context triple: [Merkle–Hellman knapsack cryptosystem, consideredSecure, false]
-
A.
hasSecurityConsideration
Indicates that there is a relevant security-related issue, risk, or precaution associated with the referenced entity.
-
B.
securedAgainst
Indicates that one entity is protected or safeguarded against threats, risks, or harmful actions originating from another entity or source.
-
C.
securedVariant
Indicates that one entity is a security-enhanced or more protected version of another entity.
-
D.
securityGuarantee
Indicates a commitment by one party to protect or defend another party against specified threats or risks.
-
E.
securesProtocol
Indicates that one entity protects, safeguards, or enforces the security of a communication or operational protocol for another entity.
- F. None of above. chosen
Provenance (4 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_69d8b90b7a188190b3fc7b8d4a6cd20a |
completed | April 10, 2026, 8:47 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e4dec02d9c81909ac6203b7d59c405 |
completed | April 19, 2026, 1:55 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e4331baeb88190b21f50a98c36c78e |
completed | April 19, 2026, 1:42 a.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69e438f5ae2c8190b11dee46534fa5a9 |
completed | April 19, 2026, 2:07 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 10:30 a.m.