Triple

T15447116
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Nanabhoy Palkhivala E370052 entity
Predicate knownFor P22 FINISHED
Object Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala E126554 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: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala | Statement: [Nanabhoy Palkhivala, knownFor, Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
Context triple: [Nanabhoy Palkhivala, knownFor, Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala]
  • A. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala chosen
    Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala is a landmark 1973 Supreme Court of India judgment that established the basic structure doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
  • B. I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab
    I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab is a landmark 1967 Indian Supreme Court case that held Parliament could not amend fundamental rights under the Constitution, sharply limiting its amending power until this view was later modified.
  • C. S. R. Bommai v. Union of India
    S. R. Bommai v. Union of India is a landmark 1994 Supreme Court of India judgment that curtailed the arbitrary use of President’s Rule and strengthened federalism by applying the basic structure doctrine to center-state relations.
  • D. Waman Rao v. Union of India
    Waman Rao v. Union of India is a landmark 1981 Supreme Court of India judgment that reaffirmed and clarified the basic structure doctrine by upholding its applicability to constitutional amendments made after the Kesavananda Bharati decision.
  • E. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India
    Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India is a landmark 1980 judgment of the Supreme Court of India that reaffirmed and strengthened the basic structure doctrine by limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
  • 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_69d85a19180081909925012fbf4e62a3 completed April 10, 2026, 2:02 a.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69e03ef767b4819099f2c0919a158321 completed April 16, 2026, 1:44 a.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69ff21afb6f4819094162ca842b7eb60 completed May 9, 2026, 11:59 a.m.
Created at: April 10, 2026, 3:21 a.m.