Triple
T18748229
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Princely State of Cutch |
E458457
|
entity |
| Predicate | successor |
P78
|
FINISHED |
| Object | State of Kutch |
—
|
NE NERFINISHED |
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: State of Kutch | Statement: [Princely State of Cutch, successor, State of Kutch]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: State of Kutch Context triple: [Princely State of Cutch, successor, State of Kutch]
-
A.
Cutch State
chosen
Cutch State was a princely state in western India, centered in the Kutch (Kachchh) region of present-day Gujarat and ruled historically by the Jadeja Rajput dynasty.
-
B.
Mundhar State
Mundhar State was a small princely hill state located in the Simla Hills region of colonial India.
-
C.
Bhajji State
Bhajji State was a small princely state in the Himalayan region of British India, historically associated with the cluster of minor hill states around Simla.
-
D.
Narsinghgarh State
Narsinghgarh State was a former princely state in central India, historically ruled by local royalty under British suzerainty.
-
E.
Bijawar State
Bijawar State was a former princely state in British India, located in the Bundelkhand region of present-day Madhya Pradesh.
- F. None of above.
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Provenance (2 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_69d8d394dc308190b6725073f5db324c |
completed | April 10, 2026, 10:40 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e579e9903c81908180c46012bd0948 |
completed | April 20, 2026, 12:57 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 11:51 a.m.