Triple
T18791289
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Dijkstra weakest precondition calculus |
E459519
|
entity |
| Predicate | instanceOf |
P0
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Hoare-style program logic |
C17275
|
CONCEPT FINISHED |
How this triple was built (1 step)
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.
CD
Concept disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target class: Hoare-style program logic Context triple: [Dijkstra weakest precondition calculus, instanceOf, Hoare-style program logic]
-
A.
logic for concurrent systems
Logic for concurrent systems is a formal framework for specifying and reasoning about the behaviors, interactions, and correctness properties of systems in which multiple processes execute and communicate simultaneously.
-
B.
work on program verification
Work on program verification involves developing and applying formal methods to mathematically prove that software systems satisfy their specified correctness, safety, and security properties.
-
C.
axiomatic semantics
chosen
Axiomatic semantics is a formal method for defining the meaning of programs by specifying logical assertions (preconditions and postconditions) that describe the behavior and correctness of program constructs.
-
D.
interactive theorem prover
An interactive theorem prover is a software system that assists users in the formalization and step-by-step verification of mathematical proofs or program properties through human-guided logical reasoning.
-
E.
higher-order logic theorem prover
A higher-order logic theorem prover is a software system that automatically or interactively checks, derives, and manipulates logical statements and proofs in a logic where functions and predicates can take other functions and predicates as arguments.
- F. None of above.
Provenance (1 batch)
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_69d8d396f54c8190ba49db31e8743842 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 10:40 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 11:53 a.m.