Triple
T3648528
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Finno-Ugric languages |
E77361
|
entity |
| Predicate | instanceOf |
P0
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Uralic language subgroup |
C3813
|
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: Uralic language subgroup Context triple: [Finno-Ugric languages, instanceOf, Uralic language subgroup]
-
A.
Uralic language
A Uralic language is a member of the Uralic language family, originating in Northern Eurasia and characterized by features such as agglutinative morphology, extensive case systems, and vowel harmony, including languages like Finnish, Hungarian, and Estonian.
-
B.
Finnic language
chosen
A Finnic language is a member of the Uralic language family spoken primarily around the Baltic Sea region, including languages such as Finnish, Estonian, and Karelian, characterized by agglutinative morphology and vowel harmony.
-
C.
Paleo-European language
A Paleo-European language is a hypothesized pre-Indo-European language or group of languages once spoken in prehistoric Europe, known primarily through substratum influences, place names, and limited archaeological and linguistic reconstruction.
-
D.
Altaic language group (disputed)
The Altaic language group (disputed) is a proposed but widely contested macro-family that would link Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, and sometimes Koreanic and Japonic languages under a common ancestral origin.
-
E.
Altaic language group (disputed)
The Altaic language group (disputed) is a proposed but widely contested macro-family that would link Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, and sometimes Koreanic and Japonic languages based on shared structural and lexical features often argued to result from areal contact rather than common ancestry.
- 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_69ad85de1b988190a45f8dbfebc806fc |
completed | March 8, 2026, 2:21 p.m. |
Created at: March 8, 2026, 3:24 p.m.