Triple
T3984616
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Rutland |
E86840
|
entity |
| Predicate | ceremonialCountyCreated |
P53190
|
FINISHED |
| Object | 1997 |
—
|
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: 1997 | Statement: [Rutland, ceremonialCountyCreated, 1997]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: ceremonialCountyCreated Context triple: [Rutland, ceremonialCountyCreated, 1997]
-
A.
ceremonialCounty
Indicates that one entity is the ceremonial (non-administrative, often traditional or representational) county associated with the other entity.
-
B.
hasCeremonialCountyStatus
Indicates that an entity is officially recognized as having the legal or traditional status of a ceremonial county.
-
C.
sharesCeremonialCountyWith
Indicates that two entities are located within the same ceremonial county.
-
D.
hasCeremonialLordLieutenant
Indicates that an administrative area is formally assigned a specific ceremonial lord-lieutenant as its official representative.
-
E.
historicCountyRecognisedFor
Indicates that a historic county is officially acknowledged or designated as being notable or distinguished for a particular feature, quality, or role.
- F. None of above. chosen
Provenance (4 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_69aed93fd9d4819085d3b2137d2346cb |
completed | March 9, 2026, 2:29 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69aefa3ef7ac8190abe02f440ff83c43 |
completed | March 9, 2026, 4:50 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69aef8f492ac819089dbb9436dbcdd2b |
completed | March 9, 2026, 4:44 p.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69aefa3cf4048190837f9ec5fa8e95e3 |
completed | March 9, 2026, 4:50 p.m. |
Created at: March 9, 2026, 3:33 p.m.