Triple
T29855846
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Kebang |
E758185
|
entity |
| Predicate | relationToStateLaw |
P103536
|
FINISHED |
| Object | parallel to formal state judiciary |
—
|
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: parallel to formal state judiciary | Statement: [Kebang, relationToStateLaw, parallel to formal state judiciary]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: relationToStateLaw Context triple: [Kebang, relationToStateLaw, parallel to formal state judiciary]
-
A.
relationshipToStateLaw
chosen
Indicates how something is connected or subject to the provisions, requirements, or authority of a particular state law.
-
B.
relationshipToState
Indicates a relationship or connection that an entity has with a particular state or governmental body.
-
C.
stateLawOf
Indicates that one entity is a law or legal provision that is in force within, or specifically governs, a particular state or subnational jurisdiction.
-
D.
stateLawRepresentedBy
Indicates that a particular state law is formally represented or advocated by a specified legal document, body, or representative entity.
-
E.
hasRelationshipToLaw
Indicates that one entity has a defined connection, relevance, or applicability to a specific law or legal framework.
- 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_69f2245a82cc8190a387e7d0118d710b |
completed | April 29, 2026, 3:31 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_6a01bdacb52481909c56b0398106640e |
completed | May 11, 2026, 11:29 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_6a01bd30c8ec8190b1e54d7658b01a8d |
completed | May 11, 2026, 11:27 a.m. |
Created at: April 29, 2026, 5:46 p.m.