Triple
T530034
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Book of Jeremiah |
E12201
|
entity |
| Predicate | containsMetaphor |
P834
|
FINISHED |
| Object | marriage metaphor for covenant |
—
|
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: marriage metaphor for covenant | Statement: [Book of Jeremiah, containsMetaphor, marriage metaphor for covenant]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: containsMetaphor Context triple: [Book of Jeremiah, containsMetaphor, marriage metaphor for covenant]
-
A.
containsParable
Indicates that one entity includes or incorporates a parable within it.
-
B.
hasLiteralMeaning
Indicates that one entity expresses the direct, explicit meaning or sense of another entity (such as a word, phrase, or symbol).
-
C.
possibleMeaning
Indicates that something may plausibly represent, signify, or be interpreted as a particular meaning or sense.
-
D.
rhetoricalDevice
chosen
Indicates that one entity is used as a rhetorical device in relation to another, such as a figure of speech, stylistic technique, or persuasive strategy within a discourse.
-
E.
hasAnaphora
Indicates that one expression in a text refers back to another earlier expression for its interpretation.
- 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_69a4933208e88190891f5debab1b776d |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:27 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69a4985e51908190a34aa82ea9dbee1e |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:49 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69a494b257108190a537dffbb9d621b5 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:34 p.m. |
Created at: March 1, 2026, 7:32 p.m.