Triple
T30898470
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Straight Ahead |
E787092
|
entity |
| Predicate | containsReligiousLyrics |
P24743
|
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: [Straight Ahead, containsReligiousLyrics, true]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: containsReligiousLyrics Context triple: [Straight Ahead, containsReligiousLyrics, true]
-
A.
hasReligiousTheme
chosen
Indicates that something (such as a work, event, or object) centrally involves or expresses religious ideas, symbols, practices, or narratives.
-
B.
hasControversialLyrics
Indicates that the lyrics associated with an entity are considered contentious, offensive, or likely to provoke public disagreement or debate.
-
C.
hasLyricsIn
Indicates that the lyrics of a work are written or available in a specified language.
-
D.
usesLyricalElementsFrom
Indicates that one work incorporates or borrows lyrical components (such as words, phrases, or stylistic features) from another work.
-
E.
hasLyricsMentioning
Indicates that the referenced lyrics explicitly mention or refer to the specified entity.
- 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_69f224bcbcb48190836df847424e4057 |
completed | April 29, 2026, 3:33 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69ff48199b1c8190bb05872f8a4f4673 |
completed | May 9, 2026, 2:43 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69ff4746b1cc8190854f70a124df7d04 |
completed | May 9, 2026, 2:40 p.m. |
Created at: April 29, 2026, 8:50 p.m.