Triple
T2263443
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Avachinsky |
E50089
|
entity |
| Predicate | isPotentiallyDangerous |
P16293
|
FINISHED |
| Object | true |
—
|
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: true | Statement: [Avachinsky, isPotentiallyDangerous, true]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: isPotentiallyDangerous Context triple: [Avachinsky, isPotentiallyDangerous, true]
-
A.
hasSecurityConsideration
Indicates that there is a relevant security-related issue, risk, or precaution associated with the referenced entity.
-
B.
susceptibleTo
Indicates that one entity is vulnerable or likely to be affected, harmed, or influenced by another entity or factor.
-
C.
hasNotableHazard
chosen
Indicates that an entity is associated with a significant risk, danger, or harmful condition that is noteworthy or exceptional.
-
D.
validIn
Indicates that a given entity, statement, or condition is applicable, correct, or legally/semantically acceptable within a specified context, scope, or domain.
-
E.
canPass
Indicates that one entity is able or permitted to move through, cross, or successfully traverse another entity or barrier.
- 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_69a88b01e0048190ba96431b5f990ba9 |
completed | March 4, 2026, 7:41 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69abc2ea65288190bc8644a07a11dfa9 |
completed | March 7, 2026, 6:17 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69abbdb592588190ac1ef5e8c54575b1 |
completed | March 7, 2026, 5:55 a.m. |
Created at: March 4, 2026, 7:48 p.m.