Triple
T25580427
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Thunder |
E641224
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasRiskAssociation |
P138266
|
FINISHED |
| Object | nearby lightning hazard |
—
|
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: nearby lightning hazard | Statement: [Thunder, hasRiskAssociation, nearby lightning hazard]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasRiskAssociation Context triple: [Thunder, hasRiskAssociation, nearby lightning hazard]
-
A.
hasRiskFrom
Indicates that one entity is exposed to or may suffer potential harm, loss, or adverse effects as a result of another entity.
-
B.
hasRiskStatus
Indicates the level or category of risk currently associated with an entity.
-
C.
hasRiskFactorFor
Indicates that one entity contributes to or increases the likelihood of another entity experiencing a particular risk or adverse outcome.
-
D.
hasHazardRelation
chosen
Indicates a relationship where one entity poses, contributes to, or is associated with a potential hazard or risk affecting another entity.
-
E.
riskListedBy
Indicates that a risk has been documented, identified, or cataloged by a particular agent or source.
- 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_69e75dc42b588190a98b58e0df359674 |
completed | April 21, 2026, 11:21 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f5ffc74fa481909b4fe24a9337f9eb |
completed | May 2, 2026, 1:44 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f5f7f99dc08190afcfb3bc4dfbec1d |
completed | May 2, 2026, 1:11 p.m. |
Created at: April 21, 2026, 4:11 p.m.