Triple
T26811201
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Metope |
E671998
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasConsortRoleWith |
P129864
|
FINISHED |
| Object | river god |
—
|
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: river god | Statement: [Metope, hasConsortRoleWith, river god]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasConsortRoleWith Context triple: [Metope, hasConsortRoleWith, river god]
-
A.
hasConsortRole
chosen
Indicates that an entity holds or is assigned the role or status of a consort in relation to another entity.
-
B.
hasConservedRoleIn
Indicates that an entity maintains the same or a similar functional role across different contexts, conditions, or evolutionary lineages.
-
C.
hasCompanionRoleIn
Indicates that an entity serves in a companion or supporting role within a specified context, activity, or relationship.
-
D.
hasConventionalPartnerRole
Indicates that one entity holds a standard or customary partner role in relation to another entity within a defined partnership context.
-
E.
hasCompanionRoleTo
Indicates that one entity serves in a companion or supporting role in relation to another entity.
- 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_69eeb3225a3c8190aaf6746efeded2f3 |
completed | April 27, 2026, 12:51 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69fe744faca881908e11e90e0a35653f |
completed | May 8, 2026, 11:39 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69fe734cbf7081909a552c5cf3b5ea59 |
completed | May 8, 2026, 11:35 p.m. |
Created at: April 27, 2026, 4:29 a.m.