Triple
T32546987
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Avernus Lake |
E831871
|
entity |
| Predicate | wasConsideredBy |
P1120
|
FINISHED |
| Object | ancient Romans |
—
|
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: ancient Romans | Statement: [Avernus Lake, wasConsideredBy, ancient Romans]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: wasConsideredBy Context triple: [Avernus Lake, wasConsideredBy, ancient Romans]
-
A.
considered
chosen
Indicates that one entity regards, judges, or thinks about another entity in a particular way or context.
-
B.
consideredIn
Indicates that one entity is taken into account, examined, or included as a factor within the context, scope, or decision framework of another entity.
-
C.
nowConsidered
Indicates that something has come to be regarded or classified in a particular way at the present time, possibly differing from how it was regarded before.
-
D.
alsoConsidered
Indicates that one item is regarded as an alternative or additional option alongside another in a given context.
-
E.
couldConsider
Indicates that one entity has the potential or option to take another entity into account when making a decision, judgment, or evaluation.
- 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_69f34925fd08819084cfe4ec566cb704 |
completed | April 30, 2026, 12:20 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f6c5c12618819096751dd2e35f9f4f |
completed | May 3, 2026, 3:49 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f6bd2a14b081908162923dfbf0a6f4 |
completed | May 3, 2026, 3:12 a.m. |
Created at: May 1, 2026, 1:02 a.m.