Triple
T30273820
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Nita |
E769875
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasDiminutiveRole |
P456
|
FINISHED |
| Object | affectionate form |
—
|
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: affectionate form | Statement: [Nita, hasDiminutiveRole, affectionate form]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasDiminutiveRole Context triple: [Nita, hasDiminutiveRole, affectionate form]
-
A.
hasDiminutive
chosen
Indicates that one entity is a diminutive form or smaller/affectionate variant of another entity.
-
B.
hasSubrole
Indicates that one role functions as a more specific, subordinate, or specialized version of another broader role.
-
C.
minimizesRoleOf
Indicates that one entity reduces, downplays, or diminishes the importance, influence, or contribution of another entity’s role.
-
D.
isMinorFigureIn
Indicates that an entity plays a small, secondary, or relatively insignificant role within another entity, such as a work, event, or context.
-
E.
hasAffectionateNicknameFor
Indicates that one entity uses or assigns a fond, affectionate, or endearing nickname 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_69f224856d9881908c7f0dd64f059672 |
completed | April 29, 2026, 3:32 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69fd64bc86848190a49f451a8fc5cf1e |
completed | May 8, 2026, 4:21 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69fd5ff4a648819090756d90fd195d9a |
completed | May 8, 2026, 4 a.m. |
Created at: April 29, 2026, 7:44 p.m.