Triple
T9581876
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | OPC |
E231190
|
entity |
| Predicate | covenantTheology |
P30449
|
FINISHED |
| Object | affirms covenant theology |
—
|
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: affirms covenant theology | Statement: [OPC, covenantTheology, affirms covenant theology]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: covenantTheology Context triple: [OPC, covenantTheology, affirms covenant theology]
-
A.
covenantalTheme
Indicates a recurring, binding relational pattern or motif structured like a covenantal agreement between parties.
-
B.
inChristianTheology
Indicates that the relationship, concept, or statement is understood specifically within the framework or doctrinal context of Christian theology.
-
C.
covenantalStatusInBible
Indicates the type or state of covenantal relationship an entity holds within the context of the Bible.
-
D.
covenantView
chosen
Indicates a relationship where one party observes, understands, or interprets the terms, conditions, or implications of a covenant or binding agreement.
-
E.
covenantAdopted
Indicates that a covenant has been formally accepted and put into effect by the relevant party or parties.
- 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_69ca848161688190a68d514a0a9d5129 |
completed | March 30, 2026, 2:11 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69cd99cd59008190888eb11f00f61994 |
completed | April 1, 2026, 10:18 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69ccd59fd7408190b36831902e3f37f7 |
completed | April 1, 2026, 8:21 a.m. |
Created at: March 30, 2026, 8:05 p.m.