Triple
T25639265
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | ric |
E642790
|
entity |
| Predicate | relatedModernEnglishWord |
P150318
|
FINISHED |
| Object | rich |
—
|
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: rich | Statement: [ric, relatedModernEnglishWord, rich]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: relatedModernEnglishWord Context triple: [ric, relatedModernEnglishWord, rich]
-
A.
modernEquivalent
Indicates that one entity serves as the contemporary or updated counterpart of another earlier or traditional entity.
-
B.
isModernFormOf
chosen
Indicates that one entity is a newer or contemporary version, adaptation, or evolution of another earlier entity.
-
C.
hasOppositeConnotationInModernUsage
Indicates that one concept or expression now carries a meaning or emotional tone in contemporary usage that is opposite to that of another.
-
D.
emergedInModernForm
Indicates that something developed into or appeared in its current recognizable form during the modern era.
-
E.
linguisticallyRelatedTo
Indicates that two entities are connected through a linguistic relationship, such as sharing a common language, origin, structure, or other language-based association.
- 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_69e77e7ce28081908b08d65ee6e5c8be |
completed | April 21, 2026, 1:41 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69fcf36d2894819089b7db8e91b63c9d |
completed | May 7, 2026, 8:17 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69fcf25c0a108190bfa823474098640b |
completed | May 7, 2026, 8:13 p.m. |
Created at: April 21, 2026, 5:38 p.m.