Triple

T8083771
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Borda count E188679 entity
Predicate violatesProperty P2111 FINISHED
Object Condorcet criterion
The Condorcet criterion is a voting system standard requiring that if a candidate would win every head-to-head contest against each other candidate, that candidate must be the overall election winner.
E711177 NE FINISHED

How this triple was built (5 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: Condorcet criterion | Statement: [Borda count, violatesProperty, Condorcet criterion]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Condorcet criterion
Context triple: [Borda count, violatesProperty, Condorcet criterion]
  • A. Condorcet paradox
    The Condorcet paradox is a voting theory phenomenon where collective preferences can become cyclic and inconsistent, even when individual voters’ preferences are perfectly rational and transitive.
  • B. Borda count
    The Borda count is a ranked voting method in which voters order candidates and points are assigned based on position in each ranking, with the candidate having the highest total score winning.
  • C. Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem
    The Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem is a fundamental result in social choice theory showing that every reasonable voting system with at least three options is susceptible to strategic manipulation by voters.
  • D. Arrow’s impossibility theorem
    Arrow’s impossibility theorem is a foundational result in social choice theory showing that no voting system can convert individual preferences into a collective ranking while simultaneously satisfying a set of seemingly reasonable fairness criteria.
  • E. Sainte-Laguë method
    The Sainte-Laguë method is a highest-averages system of party-list proportional representation that allocates seats more evenly between large and small parties than the d’Hondt method.
  • F. None of above. chosen
  • G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NEDg Description generation gpt-5.1
Instruction
Generate a one-sentence description of the target entity. 
You are given a context triple in the form (subject, predicate, object), where the object is the target entity. 
# Instructions
Use the triple to infer relevant information about the entity. Describe the entity based on what is most defining, well-known. 
Avoid repeating the information from the triple, unless really essential.
# Response Format
Return only the sentence: "Description: [one-sentence description of the target entity]"
Input
Entity: Condorcet criterion
Triple: [Borda count, violatesProperty, Condorcet criterion]
Generated description
The Condorcet criterion is a voting system standard requiring that if a candidate would win every head-to-head contest against each other candidate, that candidate must be the overall election winner.
NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Condorcet criterion
Target entity description: The Condorcet criterion is a voting system standard requiring that if a candidate would win every head-to-head contest against each other candidate, that candidate must be the overall election winner.
  • A. Condorcet paradox
    The Condorcet paradox is a voting theory phenomenon where collective preferences can become cyclic and inconsistent, even when individual voters’ preferences are perfectly rational and transitive.
  • B. Borda count
    The Borda count is a ranked voting method in which voters order candidates and points are assigned based on position in each ranking, with the candidate having the highest total score winning.
  • C. Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem
    The Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem is a fundamental result in social choice theory showing that every reasonable voting system with at least three options is susceptible to strategic manipulation by voters.
  • D. Arrow’s impossibility theorem
    Arrow’s impossibility theorem is a foundational result in social choice theory showing that no voting system can convert individual preferences into a collective ranking while simultaneously satisfying a set of seemingly reasonable fairness criteria.
  • E. Sainte-Laguë method
    The Sainte-Laguë method is a highest-averages system of party-list proportional representation that allocates seats more evenly between large and small parties than the d’Hondt method.
  • F. None of above. chosen
PD Predicate disambiguation gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: violatesProperty
Context triple: [Borda count, violatesProperty, Condorcet criterion]
  • A. violationOf
    Indicates that one entity breaches, disobeys, or infringes upon a rule, law, agreement, or right associated with another entity.
  • B. violatedPrinciple chosen
    Indicates that an entity has broken, disregarded, or acted contrary to a specified rule, norm, or guiding principle.
  • C. violationContext
    Indicates the specific circumstances, conditions, or situational factors under which a violation occurs or is considered to have occurred.
  • D. allegedViolationSystem
    Indicates a system is reported or suspected to have violated a rule, policy, or regulation, without the violation being legally or formally established.
  • E. prohibits
    Indicates that one entity forbids or disallows another entity from performing a specific action or being in a certain state.
  • F. None of above.

Provenance (6 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_69cb415e61ac81909e924aea69a7ff77 completed March 31, 2026, 3:37 a.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69cc63ff37a88190a980e023a9b7c30c completed April 1, 2026, 12:17 a.m.
NEDg Description generation batch_69cc68634dc88190bc9b9e0598929d4d completed April 1, 2026, 12:35 a.m.
NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) batch_69cc694d861c8190b504352c1fad2c36 completed April 1, 2026, 12:39 a.m.
PD Predicate disambiguation batch_69cb049f1614819087360d1a4c6f0faa completed March 30, 2026, 11:17 p.m.
Created at: March 30, 2026, 5:29 p.m.