Triple
T19532116
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Hamming bound |
E488680
|
entity |
| Predicate | comparedWith |
P278
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Plotkin bound |
—
|
NE NERFINISHED |
How this triple was built (3 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: Plotkin bound | Statement: [Hamming bound, comparedWith, Plotkin bound]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Plotkin bound Context triple: [Hamming bound, comparedWith, Plotkin bound]
-
A.
Hamming bound
The Hamming bound is a fundamental limit in coding theory that specifies the maximum number of codewords a block code can have for a given length and minimum distance while still allowing reliable error detection and correction.
-
B.
Accola–Maclachlan bound
The Accola–Maclachlan bound is a refinement in algebraic geometry that gives an improved upper limit on the size of the automorphism group of a compact Riemann surface (or algebraic curve), sharpening the classical Hurwitz bound in certain cases.
-
C.
Graham–Pollak theorem
The Graham–Pollak theorem is a result in graph theory that states the edges of a complete graph on n vertices cannot be partitioned into fewer than n−1 complete bipartite subgraphs.
-
D.
Golay code
The Golay code is a highly symmetric, perfect error-correcting code in coding theory, notable for its deep connections to sporadic simple groups, sphere packings, and the Leech lattice.
-
E.
Hoffman bound in graph theory
The Hoffman bound in graph theory is a spectral bound that uses the eigenvalues of a graph’s adjacency matrix to give an upper limit on the size of its maximum independent set (and related parameters like the chromatic number).
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Plotkin bound Target entity description: The Plotkin bound is a fundamental result in coding theory that gives an upper limit on the size of a code with given length and minimum distance, especially strong for codes with relatively large minimum distance.
-
A.
Hamming bound
The Hamming bound is a fundamental limit in coding theory that specifies the maximum number of codewords a block code can have for a given length and minimum distance while still allowing reliable error detection and correction.
-
B.
Accola–Maclachlan bound
The Accola–Maclachlan bound is a refinement in algebraic geometry that gives an improved upper limit on the size of the automorphism group of a compact Riemann surface (or algebraic curve), sharpening the classical Hurwitz bound in certain cases.
-
C.
Graham–Pollak theorem
The Graham–Pollak theorem is a result in graph theory that states the edges of a complete graph on n vertices cannot be partitioned into fewer than n−1 complete bipartite subgraphs.
-
D.
Golay code
The Golay code is a highly symmetric, perfect error-correcting code in coding theory, notable for its deep connections to sporadic simple groups, sphere packings, and the Leech lattice.
-
E.
Hoffman bound in graph theory
The Hoffman bound in graph theory is a spectral bound that uses the eigenvalues of a graph’s adjacency matrix to give an upper limit on the size of its maximum independent set (and related parameters like the chromatic number).
- F. None of above. chosen
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_69d8e8db5b6c8190984b61f91981f575 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 12:11 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e6363fd1f8819080805346efad2579 |
completed | April 20, 2026, 2:20 p.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 1:41 p.m.