Triple
T26254968
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | PSL(2,ℤ/Nℤ) |
E656691
|
entity |
| Predicate | isPerfectFor |
P160150
|
FINISHED |
| Object | N = p prime, p ≥ 5 |
—
|
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: N = p prime, p ≥ 5 | Statement: [PSL(2,ℤ/Nℤ), isPerfectFor, N = p prime, p ≥ 5]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: isPerfectFor Context triple: [PSL(2,ℤ/Nℤ), isPerfectFor, N = p prime, p ≥ 5]
-
A.
isSuitableFor
Indicates that one entity is appropriate, fitting, or well-matched for use, application, or association with another entity.
-
B.
isPerfect
Indicates that an entity possesses all required qualities or characteristics to the highest or complete degree, without flaws or deficiencies.
-
C.
isPerfectPairing
Indicates that two entities complement each other exceptionally well, forming an ideal or highly compatible combination.
-
D.
lessSuitableFor
Indicates that one entity is comparatively less appropriate, effective, or fitting than another for a given purpose, context, or condition.
-
E.
isDesignedFor
Indicates that one entity has been created, planned, or optimized specifically to serve the needs, purposes, or use of another entity.
- F. None of above. chosen
Provenance (4 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_69ee5b4d25ac819086acb51184602576 |
completed | April 26, 2026, 6:37 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f60dcd2e688190b54e36b0ff0d9187 |
completed | May 2, 2026, 2:44 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f5f7ff548c8190a23e98c5e66e0bc7 |
completed | May 2, 2026, 1:11 p.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69f5ffc6268c8190b63f6360ebadab73 |
completed | May 2, 2026, 1:44 p.m. |
Created at: April 26, 2026, 9:08 p.m.