Triple
T29713761
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Council Decision 2010/96/CFSP |
E751851
|
entity |
| Predicate | securityNature |
P180247
|
FINISHED |
| Object | military |
—
|
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: military | Statement: [Council Decision 2010/96/CFSP, securityNature, military]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: securityNature Context triple: [Council Decision 2010/96/CFSP, securityNature, military]
-
A.
security
Indicates that an entity provides protection, safety measures, or safeguards to another entity or against specific threats or risks.
-
B.
securityAttention
Indicates that an entity is the focus of monitoring, concern, or scrutiny from a security perspective.
-
C.
securityFigure
Indicates that one entity serves as a protective or safeguarding presence for another, typically responsible for ensuring its safety or security.
-
D.
securityPillar
Indicates that one entity functions as a foundational security pillar or core security domain in relation to another entity.
-
E.
relatedSecurity
Indicates that one security has a defined relationship or association with another security, such as dependency, linkage, or relevance.
- 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_69f0d62748848190b030d0a703629a7d |
completed | April 28, 2026, 3:45 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f739a638748190808e7a2930dce16e |
completed | May 3, 2026, 12:03 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f732f2dc6c8190a4e86da98cc5eb05 |
completed | May 3, 2026, 11:35 a.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69f739a58b3c81908abc2b8738a65678 |
completed | May 3, 2026, 12:03 p.m. |
Created at: April 28, 2026, 7:32 p.m.