Triple
T21053532
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Guthrie Zone G40–G50 languages |
E518648
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasNotableLanguage |
P7390
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Rufiji–Ruvuma languages |
—
|
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: Rufiji–Ruvuma languages | Statement: [Guthrie Zone G40–G50 languages, hasNotableLanguage, Rufiji–Ruvuma languages]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Rufiji–Ruvuma languages Context triple: [Guthrie Zone G40–G50 languages, hasNotableLanguage, Rufiji–Ruvuma languages]
-
A.
Sukuma–Nyamwezi languages
The Sukuma–Nyamwezi languages are a closely related group of Bantu languages spoken primarily in northwestern Tanzania by the Sukuma, Nyamwezi, and neighboring ethnic groups.
-
B.
Sena–Nyanja languages
The Sena–Nyanja languages are a group of closely related Bantu languages spoken primarily in parts of Malawi, Mozambique, and neighboring regions of southeastern Africa.
-
C.
Kwango-Kwilu languages
The Kwango-Kwilu languages are a subgroup of Bantu languages spoken primarily in the Kwango and Kwilu river regions of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and neighboring areas.
-
D.
Tswa–Ronga languages
The Tswa–Ronga languages are a closely related group of Bantu languages spoken primarily in southern Africa, including varieties such as Tsonga and Ronga.
-
E.
Mbuti languages
The Mbuti languages are a group of Central African Pygmy languages spoken by the Mbuti hunter-gatherer communities, characterized by heavy borrowing from neighboring Bantu and Central Sudanic languages and by their close association with forest-based cultures.
- 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: Rufiji–Ruvuma languages Target entity description: The Rufiji–Ruvuma languages are a subgroup of Bantu languages spoken in southeastern Tanzania and northern Mozambique, characterized by shared phonological and grammatical features that distinguish them within the wider Bantu family.
-
A.
Sukuma–Nyamwezi languages
The Sukuma–Nyamwezi languages are a closely related group of Bantu languages spoken primarily in northwestern Tanzania by the Sukuma, Nyamwezi, and neighboring ethnic groups.
-
B.
Sena–Nyanja languages
The Sena–Nyanja languages are a group of closely related Bantu languages spoken primarily in parts of Malawi, Mozambique, and neighboring regions of southeastern Africa.
-
C.
Kwango-Kwilu languages
The Kwango-Kwilu languages are a subgroup of Bantu languages spoken primarily in the Kwango and Kwilu river regions of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and neighboring areas.
-
D.
Tswa–Ronga languages
The Tswa–Ronga languages are a closely related group of Bantu languages spoken primarily in southern Africa, including varieties such as Tsonga and Ronga.
-
E.
Mbuti languages
The Mbuti languages are a group of Central African Pygmy languages spoken by the Mbuti hunter-gatherer communities, characterized by heavy borrowing from neighboring Bantu and Central Sudanic languages and by their close association with forest-based cultures.
- 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_69e0b5053ac48190921529544959e906 |
completed | April 16, 2026, 10:08 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e6fd7e087c81908712ddc63e8b1e6c |
completed | April 21, 2026, 4:30 a.m. |
Created at: April 16, 2026, 2:36 p.m.