Triple
T8080229
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Judiciary of South Africa |
E188594
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasEthicsFramework |
P10803
|
FINISHED |
| Object | judicial code of conduct |
—
|
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: judicial code of conduct | Statement: [Judiciary of South Africa, hasEthicsFramework, judicial code of conduct]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasEthicsFramework Context triple: [Judiciary of South Africa, hasEthicsFramework, judicial code of conduct]
-
A.
hasEthicsBody
Indicates that an entity is associated with, overseen by, or governed through a formal ethics committee or ethics review body.
-
B.
hasEthicalStandard
Indicates that an entity adheres to, follows, or is governed by a specified set of ethical principles or standards.
-
C.
hasEthicalAssessment
Indicates that an entity has been evaluated according to ethical criteria or standards.
-
D.
hasEthicsDocument
chosen
Indicates that an entity possesses or is associated with a formal document outlining ethical principles, guidelines, or policies.
-
E.
hasEthicalDimension
Indicates that the relationship, action, or situation involves moral considerations, value judgments, or ethical implications.
- 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_69ca82b662e88190b9323daab8c28a21 |
completed | March 30, 2026, 2:03 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69cb40a504d48190ace96e814d99b182 |
completed | March 31, 2026, 3:33 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69cb049f1614819087360d1a4c6f0faa |
completed | March 30, 2026, 11:17 p.m. |
Created at: March 30, 2026, 5:28 p.m.