Triple
T1440355
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Griggs v. Duke Power Co. |
E31055
|
entity |
| Predicate | fullName |
P16
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Griggs et al. v. Duke Power Company |
E31055
|
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: Griggs et al. v. Duke Power Company | Statement: [Griggs v. Duke Power Co., fullName, Griggs et al. v. Duke Power Company]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Griggs et al. v. Duke Power Company Context triple: [Griggs v. Duke Power Co., fullName, Griggs et al. v. Duke Power Company]
-
A.
Griggs v. Duke Power Co.
chosen
Griggs v. Duke Power Co. is a 1971 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the doctrine of disparate impact in employment discrimination law, holding that seemingly neutral job requirements that disproportionately exclude protected groups can violate Title VII.
-
B.
Employment Division v. Smith
Employment Division v. Smith is a landmark 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed protections for religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause by upholding the enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws even when they incidentally burden religion.
-
C.
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.
-
D.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
E.
Sweatt v. Painter
Sweatt v. Painter was a landmark 1950 U.S. Supreme Court case that challenged racial segregation in higher education and helped lay the groundwork for Brown v. Board of Education.
- 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_69a4991633388190a4d61b5a98aa407a |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:52 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69a4c52e4ed881908d85e0cb9fe851ac |
completed | March 1, 2026, 11:01 p.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69ad08bc290c8190902f47f718bd4f98 |
completed | March 8, 2026, 5:27 a.m. |
Created at: March 1, 2026, 8 p.m.