Triple
T5085195
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | RC5 |
E114618
|
entity |
| Predicate | supportedKeySizes |
P8686
|
FINISHED |
| Object | 0 to 2040 bits |
—
|
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: 0 to 2040 bits | Statement: [RC5, supportedKeySizes, 0 to 2040 bits]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: supportedKeySizes Context triple: [RC5, supportedKeySizes, 0 to 2040 bits]
-
A.
supportsKeyLength
chosen
Indicates that one entity is capable of handling, accepting, or operating with a specified cryptographic key length associated with another entity.
-
B.
recommendedKeyLength
Indicates the suggested or optimal length that a cryptographic key should have for secure use in a given context.
-
C.
consideredInsecureAtKeySize
Indicates that a cryptographic algorithm or mechanism is regarded as insecure when used with a specified key size.
-
D.
supportsParallelEncryption
Indicates that the subject is capable of performing encryption operations in parallel, rather than strictly sequentially.
-
E.
hasKeyAgreement
Indicates that two parties share or have established a cryptographic key agreement used to securely derive a common secret key.
- 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_69bd443e941881908eb4e8c685b6f656 |
completed | March 20, 2026, 12:57 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69bd751db4f4819088b998d7af0e6f41 |
completed | March 20, 2026, 4:26 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69bd7159adc881909effd4382c395c66 |
completed | March 20, 2026, 4:10 p.m. |
Created at: March 20, 2026, 1:40 p.m.