Triple
T6033569
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | ECMA-404 |
E134363
|
entity |
| Predicate | compatibleWith |
P203
|
FINISHED |
| Object | RFC 8259 JSON specification |
E208072
|
NE 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: RFC 8259 JSON specification | Statement: [ECMA-404, compatibleWith, RFC 8259 JSON specification]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: RFC 8259 JSON specification Context triple: [ECMA-404, compatibleWith, RFC 8259 JSON specification]
-
A.
RFC 4627
RFC 4627 is the original IETF specification that formally defined the JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) data interchange format.
-
B.
RFC 8259
chosen
RFC 8259 is the IETF specification that formally defines the JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) data interchange format, including its syntax and semantics.
-
C.
RFC 6020
RFC 6020 is the IETF specification that defines the YANG data modeling language used for network configuration and management protocols such as NETCONF.
-
D.
RFC 7622
RFC 7622 is an IETF standard that defines the addressing and formatting rules for XMPP (Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol) identifiers, known as JIDs.
-
E.
RFC 8999
RFC 8999 is an Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) standards document produced by the QUIC Working Group that specifies aspects of the QUIC transport protocol.
- F. None of above.
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
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_69c0087515148190a97475d412563865 |
completed | March 22, 2026, 3:19 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69c056b220608190b156be95632cf3b3 |
completed | March 22, 2026, 8:53 p.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69c113855ad08190b9ff826a2f39c356 |
completed | March 23, 2026, 10:18 a.m. |
Created at: March 22, 2026, 4:08 p.m.