Triple
T34255855
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Google’s HTTPS infrastructure |
E878875
|
entity |
| Predicate | instanceOf |
P0
|
FINISHED |
| Object | transport layer security deployment |
C995
|
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: transport layer security deployment Context triple: [Google’s HTTPS infrastructure, instanceOf, transport layer security deployment]
-
A.
transport layer security vulnerability
A transport layer security vulnerability is a weakness in the protocols, configurations, or implementations that protect data in transit, allowing attackers to intercept, decrypt, modify, or impersonate secure communications.
-
B.
transport layer protocol
A transport layer protocol is a communication protocol that provides end-to-end data transfer services between applications across networked devices, handling functions like segmentation, reliability, flow control, and multiplexing.
-
C.
network security protocol
chosen
A network security protocol is a defined set of rules and procedures that protect data integrity, confidentiality, and authenticity during communication between devices over a network.
-
D.
TLS extension
A TLS extension is an optional, standardized addition to the TLS protocol that allows clients and servers to negotiate extra capabilities or parameters (such as supported protocols, server names, or security features) during the handshake.
-
E.
second-layer protocol
A second-layer protocol is a communication protocol that operates on top of a lower-level (first-layer) protocol to provide additional functionality such as reliability, security, or abstraction for higher-level applications.
- 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_69f349b421cc8190b4b4655e1d612548 |
completed | April 30, 2026, 12:23 p.m. |
Created at: May 1, 2026, 1:56 a.m.