Triple
T11025018
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Pecos County |
E260595
|
entity |
| Predicate | borders |
P224
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Jeff Davis County |
E899910
|
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: Jeff Davis County | Statement: [Pecos County, borders, Jeff Davis County]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Jeff Davis County Context triple: [Pecos County, borders, Jeff Davis County]
-
A.
Jeff Davis County
chosen
Jeff Davis County is a sparsely populated county in West Texas known for its mountainous terrain, dark skies, and the town of Fort Davis.
-
B.
Jeff Davis County
Jeff Davis County is a rural county in southeastern Georgia known for its small-town communities and agricultural landscape.
-
C.
Van Zandt County
Van Zandt County is a rural county in northeastern Texas known for its agricultural heritage and small-town communities.
-
D.
Cottle County
Cottle County is a sparsely populated rural county in north-central Texas known for its ranching, agriculture, and small-town communities.
-
E.
Haskell County
Haskell County is a rural county in eastern Oklahoma, United States, known for its small communities and location within the region commonly referred to as Green Country.
- 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_69d6aa9687448190b28d353b1b6a610e |
completed | April 8, 2026, 7:20 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69d797bf78a48190a37b423812827d4e |
completed | April 9, 2026, 12:12 p.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69e3a997d7bc8190982467039e0f5504 |
completed | April 18, 2026, 3:56 p.m. |
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:25 p.m.