Triple
T8951504
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Ixcatec language |
E213359
|
entity |
| Predicate | speakerTrend |
P5318
|
FINISHED |
| Object | declining number of speakers |
—
|
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: declining number of speakers | Statement: [Ixcatec language, speakerTrend, declining number of speakers]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: speakerTrend Context triple: [Ixcatec language, speakerTrend, declining number of speakers]
-
A.
trends
Indicates that one entity exhibits a general direction of change or development over time in relation to another reference or context.
-
B.
intellectualTrend
Indicates a relationship where an idea, movement, or way of thinking is recognized as an intellectual trend influencing thought or discourse.
-
C.
hasTrend
chosen
Indicates that something exhibits or is associated with a particular pattern of change or direction over time.
-
D.
technologyTrend
Indicates a relationship where a technology is characterized as part of a broader pattern of change or direction in technological development over time.
-
E.
designTrend
Indicates a prevailing or emerging stylistic direction or pattern that influences how something is designed over a period of time.
- 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_69ca839843408190a39069a029a89f15 |
completed | March 30, 2026, 2:07 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69cc670dc0c88190b1f59e96ad88e4ee |
completed | April 1, 2026, 12:30 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69cc5ed74d288190b712d739805579dc |
completed | March 31, 2026, 11:55 p.m. |
Created at: March 30, 2026, 6:59 p.m.