Triple
T21839312
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Noric |
E539210
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasLinguisticUncertainty |
P9778
|
FINISHED |
| Object | true |
—
|
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: true | Statement: [Noric, hasLinguisticUncertainty, true]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasLinguisticUncertainty Context triple: [Noric, hasLinguisticUncertainty, true]
-
A.
hasUncertainVocabulary
Indicates that the relationship involves vocabulary whose meaning, usage, or interpretation is not clearly defined or is subject to doubt.
-
B.
hasUncertainty
chosen
Indicates that the relationship or value is associated with some level or type of uncertainty rather than being fully definite or precise.
-
C.
hasLinguisticFeature
Indicates that an entity possesses a particular linguistic property, trait, or characteristic.
-
D.
hasLinguisticVariationType
Indicates that one linguistic form is related to another by a specific type of variation, such as dialectal, orthographic, morphological, or phonological difference.
-
E.
hasLinguist
Indicates that an entity is associated with or possesses a linguist, typically as a member, employee, collaborator, or resource.
- F. None of above.
Provenance (3 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_69e0c475cda88190987d08f23caebdc1 |
completed | April 16, 2026, 11:13 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f0a7aaa4f081909e869d2e81b07b91 |
completed | April 28, 2026, 12:27 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e6be8c14748190bdcc44a14d50bea4 |
completed | April 21, 2026, 12:02 a.m. |
Created at: April 16, 2026, 6:55 p.m.