Triple
T30793383
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Aphrodite of Arles |
E784161
|
entity |
| Predicate | isRomanCopyOf |
P170146
|
FINISHED |
| Object | lost Greek original |
—
|
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: lost Greek original | Statement: [Aphrodite of Arles, isRomanCopyOf, lost Greek original]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: isRomanCopyOf Context triple: [Aphrodite of Arles, isRomanCopyOf, lost Greek original]
-
A.
hasRomanName
Indicates that an entity is associated with or known by a name derived from or used in ancient Rome.
-
B.
usesRomanNumerals
Indicates that something represents numbers or sequences using the Roman numeral system rather than standard Arabic digits.
-
C.
hasRomanEquivalent
Indicates that one entity corresponds to or is equivalent to another entity within the context of Roman culture, naming, or classification.
-
D.
romanStatus
Indicates the status or condition of an entity within a Roman-specific context, such as its legal, social, or civic standing in Roman society.
-
E.
sideRoman
Indicates that one entity is located on the Roman (Latin-script) side or version of another entity, typically in contrast to a non-Roman or alternative script side.
- 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_69f224b2e2a48190b19aa43db9da5b67 |
completed | April 29, 2026, 3:33 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f6901035b88190ba857258707694cf |
completed | May 3, 2026, midnight |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f686140aa08190a35f62572b2db9b6 |
completed | May 2, 2026, 11:17 p.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69f68848ad348190a2fb6e841dcfdb7d |
completed | May 2, 2026, 11:27 p.m. |
Created at: April 29, 2026, 8:42 p.m.