Triple

T12412586
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Harlan Fiske Stone E296552 entity
Predicate knownFor P22 FINISHED
Object Stone’s Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co. E193724 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: Stone’s Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co. | Statement: [Harlan Fiske Stone, knownFor, Stone’s Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co.]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Stone’s Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co.
Context triple: [Harlan Fiske Stone, knownFor, Stone’s Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co.]
  • A. Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co. chosen
    Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products Co. is a famous passage in a 1938 Supreme Court opinion suggesting that certain types of legislation—especially those affecting discrete and insular minorities or fundamental rights—may warrant more rigorous judicial scrutiny than ordinary economic regulation.
  • B. United States v. Carolene Products Co.
    United States v. Carolene Products Co. is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court case best known for its Footnote Four, which laid the groundwork for modern constitutional scrutiny of legislation affecting fundamental rights and discrete and insular minorities.
  • C. International Shoe Co. v. Washington
    International Shoe Co. v. Washington is a landmark 1945 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the modern "minimum contacts" standard for determining when a state may exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant.
  • D. Noerr-Pennington doctrine
    The Noerr-Pennington doctrine is a U.S. legal principle that shields individuals and entities from antitrust liability when they petition the government, even if their efforts have anticompetitive effects.
  • E. Katzenbach v. Morgan
    Katzenbach v. Morgan is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power under the Fourteenth Amendment to prohibit certain state voting restrictions, reinforcing federal authority to protect voting rights.
  • 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_69d6ad9f464c81909db36d7e96e34b9e completed April 8, 2026, 7:33 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69d94d6b0f9c8190813b6fe3f97570ac completed April 10, 2026, 7:20 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69f6348ccaf88190aeb0dfb7fe1d8dec completed May 2, 2026, 5:29 p.m.
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:55 p.m.