Triple
T30083164
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Down Ampney |
E764526
|
entity |
| Predicate | associatedLiturgicalUse |
P9871
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Christian worship |
—
|
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: Christian worship | Statement: [Down Ampney, associatedLiturgicalUse, Christian worship]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: associatedLiturgicalUse Context triple: [Down Ampney, associatedLiturgicalUse, Christian worship]
-
A.
liturgicalUsage
Indicates how something is used, practiced, or functions within a specific liturgical or worship context.
-
B.
includesLiturgicalUse
Indicates that something encompasses or involves use within a liturgical or formal religious worship context.
-
C.
usedInLiturgy
chosen
Indicates that something is employed or incorporated as part of a formal religious liturgy or worship service.
-
D.
aimsForLiturgicalUse
Indicates that something is intended or designed specifically for use in liturgical or formal religious worship contexts.
-
E.
liturgicalUsePromoted
Indicates that an entity actively encouraged or advocated for the adoption or increased practice of a particular liturgical use or rite.
- 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_69f22473c0fc8190a926a8051b3b378b |
completed | April 29, 2026, 3:32 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_6a037c876524819098545e6037d3107d |
completed | May 12, 2026, 7:16 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_6a0379e0f3d88190a4ee7b0673f1ef90 |
completed | May 12, 2026, 7:05 p.m. |
Created at: April 29, 2026, 7:03 p.m.