Triple
T6095896
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Hangul Jamo Extended-B |
E135875
|
entity |
| Predicate | script |
P505
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Hangul |
E25453
|
NE 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: Hangul | Statement: [Hangul Jamo Extended-B, script, Hangul]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Hangul Context triple: [Hangul Jamo Extended-B, script, Hangul]
-
A.
Hangul
chosen
Hangul is the native alphabetic writing system of the Korean language, renowned for its scientific design and ease of learning.
-
B.
Hanja
Hanja is the set of traditional Chinese characters historically used to write Korean, especially for proper names, academic terms, and classical texts.
-
C.
Korean
Korean is an East Asian language spoken primarily in both North and South Korea, known for its unique Hangul writing system and distinct linguistic structure.
-
D.
Hangul Jamo
Hangul Jamo is a Unicode block that encodes the individual consonant and vowel letters used to write the Korean Hangul script.
-
E.
Yi languages
The Yi languages are a group of closely related Tibeto-Burman languages spoken primarily by the Yi people in southwestern China, especially in Yunnan, Sichuan, Guizhou, and Guangxi.
- F. None of above.
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
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_69c0087cd3c48190b459848c72d84eb1 |
completed | March 22, 2026, 3:19 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69c05a9764048190ad4e9a02f9a25ab6 |
completed | March 22, 2026, 9:09 p.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69c135879c988190bd35fa01674d6a15 |
completed | March 23, 2026, 12:43 p.m. |
Created at: March 22, 2026, 4:12 p.m.