Triple
T22483635
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | G major |
E555827
|
entity |
| Predicate | enharmonicKeySignatureEquivalent |
P101166
|
FINISHED |
| Object | E minor |
—
|
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: E minor | Statement: [G major, enharmonicKeySignatureEquivalent, E minor]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: enharmonicKeySignatureEquivalent Context triple: [G major, enharmonicKeySignatureEquivalent, E minor]
-
A.
enharmonicEquivalent
chosen
Indicates that two musical notes, intervals, or keys sound the same in pitch but are written differently in notation.
-
B.
hasHarmonicMinorVariant
Indicates that one musical element (such as a scale, key, or melody) has a corresponding form that is derived from or expressed in the harmonic minor variant.
-
C.
numberOfAccidentals
Indicates the relationship that specifies how many accidentals (sharps, flats, or naturals) are associated with a given musical element.
-
D.
tonalityProgression
Indicates a change or development in musical key or tonal center over the course of a piece or passage.
-
E.
diatonicScale
Indicates that a musical element (such as a note, chord, or melody) belongs to or is derived from a specific diatonic scale.
- 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_69e11e53897c819088863779f8c50bb0 |
completed | April 16, 2026, 5:37 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f15c3b03d881909e286a124c1a2b1c |
completed | April 29, 2026, 1:17 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e898b6eee08190ba673a0ee329e671 |
completed | April 22, 2026, 9:45 a.m. |
Created at: April 16, 2026, 8:49 p.m.