Domains

What Are Domains?

A domain is a YAML configuration that defines:

Entity types: What kinds of things to extract (people, organizations, concepts, etc.)
Relation types: How entities can be connected
Extraction hints: Guidance for the LLM to improve accuracy
Review requirements: Which relations need human validation
System context: Background information to help the LLM understand your documents

Domains act as a schema that guides extraction, ensuring consistency across documents.

Bundled Domains

sift-kg ships with four production-ready domains:

Schema-Free

Best for: Exploratory analysis, unknown document types, rapid prototyping

The schema-free domain lets the LLM discover entity and relation types from your documents:

name: "Schema-Free"
version: "1.0.0"
schema_free: true
entity_types: {}
relation_types: {}

How it works:

Samples your documents
LLM designs entity and relation types tailored to the corpus
Schema saved to discovered_domain.yaml
Uses discovered schema for consistent extraction

When to use:

You don’t know what entity types exist in your documents
You want to explore a new dataset
You’re building a custom domain and want to see what the LLM finds

Example discovered schema:

entity_types:
  TECHNIQUE:
    description: "Machine learning methods and algorithms"
  BENCHMARK:
    description: "Evaluation datasets and metrics"
  MODEL:
    description: "Trained neural network architectures"
relation_types:
  EVALUATED_ON:
    description: "Model performance measured on benchmark"
    source_types: [MODEL]
    target_types: [BENCHMARK]

General Purpose

Best for: Business documents, reports, news articles, general text

The general domain provides broad coverage for common entity types:

name: "General Purpose"
fallback_relation: ASSOCIATED_WITH

entity_types:
  PERSON:
    description: "Individual people mentioned in documents"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Look for full names, titles, roles, and biographical details"
      - "Include birth/death dates, occupations, and affiliations"
  
  ORGANIZATION:
    description: "Companies, institutions, government bodies, NGOs"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Include full official names and common abbreviations"
      - "Note the type of organization"
  
  LOCATION:
    description: "Geographic places — cities, countries, addresses, regions"
  
  DOCUMENT:
    description: "Referenced documents, records, filings, publications"
  
  EVENT:
    description: "Significant occurrences with dates"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Capture the date, participants, and outcome"
      - "Note the type of event"

relation_types:
  MEMBER_OF:
    description: "Person belongs to or is employed by an organization"
    source_types: [PERSON]
    target_types: [ORGANIZATION]
  
  LOCATED_IN:
    description: "Entity is located within a geographic area"
    source_types: [ORGANIZATION, LOCATION, EVENT]
    target_types: [LOCATION]
  
  PARTICIPATED_IN:
    description: "Person or organization participated in an event"
    source_types: [PERSON, ORGANIZATION]
    target_types: [EVENT]
  
  OWNS:
    description: "Person or organization owns property or assets"
    source_types: [PERSON, ORGANIZATION]
    target_types: [ORGANIZATION, LOCATION]
  
  RELATED_TO:
    description: "Family or personal relationship between people"
    source_types: [PERSON]
    target_types: [PERSON]
    symmetric: true

Full schema: /home/daytona/workspace/source/src/sift_kg/domains/bundled/general/domain.yaml

OSINT Investigation

Best for: Corporate investigations, beneficial ownership tracing, financial networks

Optimized for open-source intelligence work:

name: "OSINT Investigation"

system_context: |
  You are analyzing documents for an open-source intelligence investigation.
  Focus on identifying corporate structures, beneficial ownership chains,
  financial relationships, and connections between individuals and entities.
  Pay close attention to shell companies, nominee directors, offshore
  jurisdictions, and obfuscated ownership patterns.

entity_types:
  PERSON:
    description: "Individuals — directors, shareholders, signatories, beneficiaries"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Note aliases, maiden names, and name variations"
      - "Capture roles like director, secretary, nominee, beneficial owner"
  
  ORGANIZATION:
    description: "Companies, partnerships, trusts, foundations"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Note jurisdiction of incorporation and registration numbers"
      - "Distinguish between operating companies and holding/shell entities"
  
  SHELL_COMPANY:
    description: "Entities with no apparent operations"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Flag companies at mass-registration addresses"
      - "Look for nominee directors, no employees, minimal activity"
  
  FINANCIAL_ACCOUNT:
    description: "Bank accounts, investment accounts, crypto wallets, trusts"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Capture account numbers, bank names, and account holders"
      - "Note correspondent banking relationships"
  
  LOCATION:
    description: "Addresses, jurisdictions, countries, registered offices"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Note offshore jurisdictions: BVI, Cayman, Panama, Seychelles"
      - "Identify addresses shared by multiple entities"

relation_types:
  BENEFICIAL_OWNER_OF:
    description: "Person is ultimate beneficial owner (direct or indirect)"
    source_types: [PERSON]
    target_types: [ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY]
    review_required: true  # Requires human validation
    extraction_hints:
      - "May be indirect through chains of holding companies"
      - "Look for ownership percentages and control mechanisms"
  
  DIRECTOR_OF:
    description: "Person serves as director, officer, or secretary"
    source_types: [PERSON]
    target_types: [ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY]
  
  SHAREHOLDER_OF:
    description: "Person or entity holds shares in another entity"
    source_types: [PERSON, ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY]
    target_types: [ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY]
    extraction_hints:
      - "Note ownership percentages and share classes"
      - "Bearer shares indicate potential obfuscation"
  
  TRANSACTED_WITH:
    description: "Financial transaction between entities or through accounts"
    source_types: [PERSON, ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY, FINANCIAL_ACCOUNT]
    target_types: [PERSON, ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY, FINANCIAL_ACCOUNT]
    review_required: true
    extraction_hints:
      - "Capture amount, currency, date, and stated purpose"
      - "Note intermediary banks or correspondent accounts"
  
  SUBSIDIARY_OF:
    description: "Entity is a subsidiary, branch, or division of a parent"
    source_types: [ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY]
    target_types: [ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY]
  
  REGISTERED_IN:
    description: "Entity is registered or incorporated in a jurisdiction"
    source_types: [ORGANIZATION, SHELL_COMPANY]
    target_types: [LOCATION]

Full schema: /home/daytona/workspace/source/src/sift_kg/domains/bundled/osint/domain.yaml

Academic Research

Best for: Literature reviews, research mapping, understanding idea networks

Maps the intellectual landscape of research areas:

name: "Academic Research"

system_context: |
  You are analyzing academic papers to map the intellectual landscape.
  Your goal is to extract the structure of ideas — not bibliometric metadata.
  
  Focus on:
  - Which theories EXPLAIN which phenomena or findings
  - Which findings SUPPORT or CONTRADICT which theories
  - Which methods are USED to produce which findings
  - Which systems IMPLEMENT which theories or methods
  - Which researchers PROPOSED key theories, methods, or findings
  
  Distinguish between abstract ideas and concrete artifacts:
  - "Transformer" as an architecture is a THEORY
  - "GPT-2" the trained model is a SYSTEM
  - "reinforcement learning" is a METHOD
  - "PPO" the algorithm is a METHOD
  - "ChatGPT" is a SYSTEM
  - Named benchmarks (GLUE, ImageNet) are SYSTEMs

entity_types:
  CONCEPT:
    description: "Core ideas, constructs, variables, technical terms"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Look for defined terms and key variables"
      - "Use CONCEPT for ideas without named frameworks"
      - "If it has a proper name and makes predictions, use THEORY"
  
  THEORY:
    description: "Named theoretical frameworks, models, paradigms"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Must have a proper name (e.g. 'Cognitive Load Theory')"
      - "Include paradigms and schools of thought"
      - "Note the originator or key proponents"
  
  METHOD:
    description: "Research methods, techniques, analytical approaches, tools"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Include study designs, analysis techniques, and instruments"
      - "Capture software tools central to methodology"
  
  FINDING:
    description: "Key results, conclusions, effects, empirical observations"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Capture effect sizes and statistical significance"
      - "Include null results and negative findings"
      - "Use concise canonical labels (e.g. 'bilingual cognitive advantage')"
  
  PHENOMENON:
    description: "Observable events, behaviors, patterns being studied"
    extraction_hints:
      - "The real-world thing being investigated"
      - "PHENOMENON is observable; CONCEPT is abstract; THEORY explains it"
      - "Examples: 'urban heat island', 'antibiotic resistance'"
  
  RESEARCHER:
    description: "Individual academics credited with originating ideas"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Extract researchers attached to specific contributions"
      - "Skip routine author mentions"
  
  SYSTEM:
    description: "Named systems, models, tools, artifacts built by researchers"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Use for specific implementations: BERT, GPT-4, ImageNet, SPSS"
      - "SYSTEM is concrete; METHOD is abstract"
      - "Include benchmarks and datasets with proper names"
  
  FIELD:
    description: "Academic disciplines, subfields, interdisciplinary areas"

relation_types:
  SUPPORTS:
    description: "Provides evidence for, validates, demonstrates effectiveness"
    source_types: [FINDING, PUBLICATION, SYSTEM, METHOD, CONCEPT]
    target_types: [THEORY, CONCEPT, FINDING, SYSTEM, METHOD, PHENOMENON]
  
  CONTRADICTS:
    description: "Provides evidence against, challenges, refutes"
    source_types: [FINDING, PUBLICATION, SYSTEM, METHOD]
    target_types: [THEORY, CONCEPT, FINDING, SYSTEM, METHOD]
    review_required: true
  
  EXTENDS:
    description: "Builds upon or refines another entity"
    source_types: [THEORY, CONCEPT, METHOD, SYSTEM]
    target_types: [THEORY, CONCEPT, METHOD, SYSTEM]
  
  IMPLEMENTS:
    description: "System implements or is based on a theory/method/concept"
    source_types: [SYSTEM]
    target_types: [THEORY, METHOD, CONCEPT, SYSTEM]
  
  USES_METHOD:
    description: "Entity uses or employs a specific method/technique/system"
    source_types: [PUBLICATION, FINDING, SYSTEM, METHOD, THEORY]
    target_types: [METHOD, SYSTEM, CONCEPT]
  
  EXPLAINS:
    description: "Provides explanation, mechanism, or account for"
    source_types: [THEORY, CONCEPT, METHOD, SYSTEM]
    target_types: [PHENOMENON, FINDING, CONCEPT, METHOD, SYSTEM]
  
  PROPOSED_BY:
    description: "Entity originated from a researcher or publication"
    source_types: [THEORY, CONCEPT, METHOD, FINDING, SYSTEM, PUBLICATION]
    target_types: [RESEARCHER, PUBLICATION]

Full schema: /home/daytona/workspace/source/src/sift_kg/domains/bundled/academic/domain.yaml

Using Bundled Domains

Specify a bundled domain with the --domain-name flag:

sift extract ./docs --domain-name osint
sift extract ./papers --domain-name academic
sift extract ./reports --domain-name general

Or set it in your sift.yaml project config:

domain: osint  # Can be a bundled name or path to custom domain
model: openai/gpt-4o-mini
output: output

List all available bundled domains:

sift domains

Output:

┌─────────────┬────────────────────────────────────┬──────────┬───────────┐
│ Name        │ Description                        │ Entities │ Relations │
├─────────────┼────────────────────────────────────┼──────────┼───────────┤
│ schema-free │ LLM-driven schema discovery        │ 0        │ 0         │
│ general     │ Default domain for general docs    │ 5        │ 8         │
│ osint       │ Open-source intelligence           │ 6        │ 9         │
│ academic    │ Academic research mapping          │ 8        │ 10        │
└─────────────┴────────────────────────────────────┴──────────┴───────────┘

Creating Custom Domains

Build a domain tailored to your use case:

Basic Structure

name: "Legal Case Analysis"
version: "1.0.0"
description: |
  Domain for analyzing court filings, depositions, and legal documents.
  Optimized for tracking parties, claims, evidence, and legal arguments.

# Optional: context passed to LLM for better understanding
system_context: |
  You are analyzing legal documents to map parties, claims, evidence,
  and legal arguments. Focus on:
  - Who is involved (plaintiffs, defendants, witnesses, attorneys)
  - What claims are being made
  - What evidence supports or refutes claims
  - Legal precedents and statutes cited

# Fallback for undefined relation types
fallback_relation: ASSOCIATED_WITH

entity_types:
  PARTY:
    description: "Plaintiffs, defendants, intervening parties"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Include individual names and corporate entities"
      - "Note their role: plaintiff, defendant, witness, attorney"
  
  CLAIM:
    description: "Legal claims, causes of action, defenses"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Identify the type of claim (breach of contract, fraud, etc.)"
      - "Note the relief sought"
  
  EVIDENCE:
    description: "Documents, testimony, exhibits, physical evidence"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Include exhibit numbers and document identifiers"
      - "Note what the evidence purports to show"
  
  PRECEDENT:
    description: "Case law, statutes, regulations cited"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Include case names and citations"
      - "Note the legal principle established"

relation_types:
  BROUGHT_BY:
    description: "Claim filed by a party"
    source_types: [CLAIM]
    target_types: [PARTY]
  
  AGAINST:
    description: "Claim asserted against a party"
    source_types: [CLAIM]
    target_types: [PARTY]
  
  SUPPORTS:
    description: "Evidence supports a claim or argument"
    source_types: [EVIDENCE]
    target_types: [CLAIM]
    review_required: true  # Validate evidence-claim links
  
  CONTRADICTS:
    description: "Evidence contradicts a claim or argument"
    source_types: [EVIDENCE]
    target_types: [CLAIM]
    review_required: true
  
  CITES:
    description: "Argument or claim relies on legal precedent"
    source_types: [CLAIM, PARTY]
    target_types: [PRECEDENT]
  
  REPRESENTED_BY:
    description: "Party represented by attorney or law firm"
    source_types: [PARTY]
    target_types: [PARTY]  # Attorneys are also PARTYs

Advanced Features

1. Type Constraints

Restrict which entities can be connected:

relation_types:
  SHAREHOLDER_OF:
    source_types: [PERSON, ORGANIZATION]  # Only these can be shareholders
    target_types: [ORGANIZATION]           # Only orgs can have shareholders

Invalid relations are either:

Dropped if domain_relation_types is provided to build_graph
Mapped to fallback_relation if defined
Kept as-is (no constraints)

2. Symmetric Relations

Mark bidirectional relationships:

relation_types:
  RELATED_TO:
    description: "Family or personal relationship"
    source_types: [PERSON]
    target_types: [PERSON]
    symmetric: true  # A RELATED_TO B implies B RELATED_TO A

3. Review Requirements

Flag specific relation types for human validation:

relation_types:
  BENEFICIAL_OWNER_OF:
    description: "Ultimate beneficial ownership (direct or indirect)"
    review_required: true  # Always flag for review

During sift build, all instances of this relation type are written to relation_review.yaml regardless of confidence.

4. Canonical Vocabularies

Enforce closed vocabularies for specific entity types:

entity_types:
  EVALUATION_METRIC:
    description: "Standard ML evaluation metrics"
    canonical_names:
      - "accuracy"
      - "precision"
      - "recall"
      - "F1 score"
      - "BLEU"
      - "ROUGE"
      - "perplexity"
    canonical_fallback_type: "CONCEPT"  # Retype non-canonical extractions

How it works:

Canonical entities are pre-created in the graph
Extractions matching canonical names (case-insensitive) map to canonical entities
Non-canonical entities are retyped to canonical_fallback_type
All relations resolve correctly

Example:

Extracted: "Accuracy" → Merged to canonical "accuracy"
Extracted: "f1" → Merged to canonical "F1 score"
Extracted: "my-custom-metric" → Retyped to CONCEPT (fallback)

Domain File Placement

Save your custom domain as a YAML file:

mkdir -p domains
touch domains/legal.yaml

Use it with the --domain flag:

sift extract ./cases --domain domains/legal.yaml

Or set it in sift.yaml:

domain: domains/legal.yaml

Domain Best Practices

1. Start with Schema-Free

Before building a custom domain, run schema-free extraction to see what the LLM discovers:

sift extract ./docs --domain-name schema-free
cat output/discovered_domain.yaml

Use the discovered schema as a starting point for your custom domain.

2. Use Extraction Hints

Guide the LLM with specific instructions:

entity_types:
  SOFTWARE_VERSION:
    description: "Specific software releases and version numbers"
    extraction_hints:
      - "Include version numbers: 'Python 3.11', 'GPT-4', 'Linux 5.15'"
      - "Distinguish from the software name itself"
      - "Capture release dates when mentioned"

3. Provide System Context

Help the LLM understand your domain:

system_context: |
  You are analyzing cybersecurity incident reports. Focus on:
  - Attack vectors and techniques (map to MITRE ATT&CK when possible)
  - Threat actors and APT groups
  - Vulnerabilities and CVE identifiers
  - Affected systems and infrastructure
  - Timeline of compromise and remediation
  
  Use precise technical terminology. Don't invent entity names.

4. Balance Granularity

Too coarse:

entity_types:
  THING: "Any entity mentioned in documents"  # Not useful

Too fine-grained:

entity_types:
  PERSON_FIRST_NAME: "First names only"
  PERSON_LAST_NAME: "Last names only"
  PERSON_MIDDLE_NAME: "Middle names only"
  # Extract full names as PERSON instead

Just right:

entity_types:
  PERSON:
    description: "Individual people"
  ORGANIZATION:
    description: "Companies and institutions"
  ROLE:
    description: "Job titles and positions"

5. Test Iteratively

Domain design is iterative:

Extract a sample of documents
Review the results
Add hints or adjust types
Re-extract with --force
Repeat until quality is acceptable

# Test on 5 documents first
sift extract ./sample-docs --domain domains/v1.yaml
# Review output/extractions/*.json

# Refine domain → domains/v2.yaml

# Re-extract with updated domain
sift extract ./sample-docs --domain domains/v2.yaml --force

6. Version Your Domains

Track domain evolution:

name: "OSINT Investigation"
version: "2.1.0"  # Increment when making breaking changes
description: |
  Changelog:
  - v2.1.0: Added CRYPTOCURRENCY_WALLET entity type
  - v2.0.0: Split COMPANY into ORGANIZATION and SHELL_COMPANY
  - v1.0.0: Initial release

Domain Configuration Reference

Top-Level Fields

Field	Type	Required	Description
`name`	string	Yes	Domain name
`version`	string	No	Semantic version (default: “1.0.0”)
`description`	string	No	Domain description
`entity_types`	object	Yes	Entity type definitions
`relation_types`	object	Yes	Relation type definitions
`system_context`	string	No	LLM context for extraction
`fallback_relation`	string	No	Default relation for undefined types
`schema_free`	boolean	No	Enable schema discovery mode

Entity Type Config

Field	Type	Default	Description
`description`	string	""	Entity type description
`extraction_hints`	list[string]	[]	LLM guidance for extraction
`canonical_names`	list[string]	[]	Closed vocabulary (optional)
`canonical_fallback_type`	string	null	Type for non-canonical entities

Relation Type Config

Field	Type	Default	Description
`description`	string	""	Relation type description
`source_types`	list[string]	[]	Valid source entity types
`target_types`	list[string]	[]	Valid target entity types
`symmetric`	boolean	false	Bidirectional relationship
`extraction_hints`	list[string]	[]	LLM guidance for extraction
`review_required`	boolean	false	Flag all instances for review

Complete schema: /home/daytona/workspace/source/src/sift_kg/domains/models.py

Next Steps

How It Works

Understand the full pipeline from extraction to visualization

Entity Resolution

Learn how sift-kg finds and merges duplicate entities

Get Started

Core Concepts

Guides

Examples

What Are Domains?

Bundled Domains

Schema-Free

General Purpose

OSINT Investigation

Academic Research

Using Bundled Domains

Creating Custom Domains

Basic Structure

Advanced Features

1. Type Constraints

2. Symmetric Relations

3. Review Requirements

4. Canonical Vocabularies

Domain File Placement

Domain Best Practices

1. Start with Schema-Free

2. Use Extraction Hints

3. Provide System Context

4. Balance Granularity

5. Test Iteratively

6. Version Your Domains

Domain Configuration Reference

Top-Level Fields

Entity Type Config

Relation Type Config

Next Steps

How It Works

Entity Resolution

Build docs developers (and LLMs) love

Get Started

Core Concepts

Guides

Examples

Documentation Index

​What Are Domains?

​Bundled Domains

​Schema-Free

​General Purpose

​OSINT Investigation

​Academic Research

​Using Bundled Domains

​Creating Custom Domains

​Basic Structure

​Advanced Features

​1. Type Constraints

​2. Symmetric Relations

​3. Review Requirements

​4. Canonical Vocabularies

​Domain File Placement

​Domain Best Practices

​1. Start with Schema-Free

​2. Use Extraction Hints

​3. Provide System Context

​4. Balance Granularity

​5. Test Iteratively

​6. Version Your Domains

​Domain Configuration Reference

​Top-Level Fields

​Entity Type Config

​Relation Type Config

​Next Steps

How It Works

Entity Resolution

Build docs developers (and LLMs) love

What Are Domains?

Bundled Domains

Schema-Free

General Purpose

OSINT Investigation

Academic Research

Using Bundled Domains

Creating Custom Domains

Basic Structure

Advanced Features

1. Type Constraints

2. Symmetric Relations

3. Review Requirements

4. Canonical Vocabularies

Domain File Placement

Domain Best Practices

1. Start with Schema-Free

2. Use Extraction Hints

3. Provide System Context

4. Balance Granularity

5. Test Iteratively

6. Version Your Domains

Domain Configuration Reference

Top-Level Fields

Entity Type Config

Relation Type Config

Next Steps