Triple
T31646903
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | HOL4 |
E807605
|
entity |
| Predicate | instanceOf |
P0
|
FINISHED |
| Object | LCF-style theorem prover |
C26026
|
CONCEPT FINISHED |
How this triple was built (1 step)
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.
CD
Concept disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target class: LCF-style theorem prover Context triple: [HOL4, instanceOf, LCF-style theorem prover]
-
A.
higher-order logic theorem prover
A higher-order logic theorem prover is a software system that automatically or interactively checks, derives, and manipulates logical statements and proofs in a logic where functions and predicates can take other functions and predicates as arguments.
-
B.
interactive theorem prover
chosen
An interactive theorem prover is a software system that assists users in the formalization and step-by-step verification of mathematical proofs or program properties through human-guided logical reasoning.
-
C.
theorem prover
A theorem prover is a software system or algorithm that automatically or semi-automatically checks the validity of logical statements by deriving conclusions from axioms and inference rules.
-
D.
pioneer in automated theorem proving
A pioneer in automated theorem proving is an individual who makes foundational contributions to the theory, design, or implementation of systems that enable computers to automatically generate and verify mathematical proofs.
-
E.
automated theorem proving technique
An automated theorem proving technique is a systematic, algorithmic method used by computer programs to derive logical conclusions and verify the validity of mathematical or logical statements without human intervention.
- F. None of above.
Provenance (1 batch)
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_69f348d9ce58819093ea2da83cbeeec1 |
completed | April 30, 2026, 12:19 p.m. |
Created at: April 30, 2026, 10:51 p.m.