Triple
T8489710
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | RFC 8996 |
E200936
|
entity |
| Predicate | BCPNumber |
P34024
|
FINISHED |
| Object | BCP 195 |
E700354
|
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: BCP 195 | Statement: [RFC 8996, BCPNumber, BCP 195]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: BCP 195 Context triple: [RFC 8996, BCPNumber, BCP 195]
-
A.
BCP 195
chosen
BCP 195 is an IETF Best Current Practice document that provides modern security recommendations for the use of Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram TLS (DTLS) in Internet protocols.
-
B.
BCP 175
BCP 175 is an IETF Best Current Practice document that defines procedures and policies for managing the DNS root zone’s trust anchor for DNSSEC.
-
C.
BCP 9
BCP 9 is a Best Current Practice document in the IETF series that defines key procedures and guidelines for the Internet standards process.
-
D.
BCP 14
BCP 14 is an IETF Best Current Practice document that standardizes the use of requirement-level keywords like “MUST,” “SHOULD,” and “MAY” in technical specifications.
-
E.
BCP 38
BCP 38 is an Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Best Current Practice that recommends network ingress filtering to prevent IP address spoofing and reduce the impact of denial-of-service attacks.
- 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_69ca831d7b148190a6e32c1de43ab13b |
completed | March 30, 2026, 2:05 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69cbe5596f1c8190aead21a245f21c07 |
completed | March 31, 2026, 3:16 p.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69ce3a4e5be48190b5c598123ef75f8b |
completed | April 2, 2026, 9:43 a.m. |
Created at: March 30, 2026, 6:13 p.m.