Triple
T591810
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Probabilistic Encryption |
E17287
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasSecurityNotion |
P16014
|
FINISHED |
| Object | IND-CPA |
—
|
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: IND-CPA | Statement: [Probabilistic Encryption, hasSecurityNotion, IND-CPA]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasSecurityNotion Context triple: [Probabilistic Encryption, hasSecurityNotion, IND-CPA]
-
A.
hasSecurityArchitecture
Indicates that an entity is associated with or defined by a particular security architecture design or framework.
-
B.
hasSecuritySupport
Indicates that one entity provides security-related assistance, maintenance, or protection services for another entity.
-
C.
securityFeature
Indicates that an entity provides, embodies, or is associated with a mechanism or property intended to enhance safety, protection, or defense against threats or vulnerabilities.
-
D.
securityMechanism
Indicates a relationship where one entity serves as a means or method to protect another entity from threats, vulnerabilities, or unauthorized actions.
-
E.
securityStatus
Indicates the current level or condition of protection, risk, or vulnerability associated with an entity or system.
- 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_69a49379d09c8190ac7e00b24e2810b1 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:28 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69a49bbaf53081908eed240bed09f63b |
completed | March 1, 2026, 8:04 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69a494cc13988190892ca10bd7ae9f09 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:34 p.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69a4985ada988190aaea628a9b55bca4 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:49 p.m. |
Created at: March 1, 2026, 7:33 p.m.