Triple

T11054960
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Ableman v. Booth E261349 entity
Predicate relatedTo P37 FINISHED
Object Prigg v. Pennsylvania E261348 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: Prigg v. Pennsylvania | Statement: [Ableman v. Booth, relatedTo, Prigg v. Pennsylvania]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Prigg v. Pennsylvania
Context triple: [Ableman v. Booth, relatedTo, Prigg v. Pennsylvania]
  • A. Prigg v. Pennsylvania chosen
    Prigg v. Pennsylvania was an 1842 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal supremacy over state laws in enforcing the return of escaped enslaved people, significantly strengthening the legal force of the Fugitive Slave Clause.
  • B. Morgan v. Virginia
    Morgan v. Virginia was a 1946 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down state laws mandating racial segregation on interstate buses, laying important groundwork for later civil rights actions.
  • C. Paul v. Virginia
    Paul v. Virginia is an 1869 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held corporations are not “citizens” under the Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause, allowing states to regulate foreign insurance companies.
  • D. Cohens v. Virginia
    Cohens v. Virginia is an 1821 U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed the Court’s authority to review state criminal proceedings involving federal law, strengthening federal judicial power over the states.
  • E. Yick Wo v. Hopkins
    Yick Wo v. Hopkins is an 1886 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racially discriminatory enforcement of a facially neutral law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • 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_69d6aa98650481908609c7c56bfa7902 completed April 8, 2026, 7:20 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69d798a0890481909c1d4f9d5b23f33a completed April 9, 2026, 12:16 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69e42d5ca2ec819088036a09861cc116 completed April 19, 2026, 1:18 a.m.
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:26 p.m.