Triple
T16102018
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Donald B. Verrilli Jr. |
E390641
|
entity |
| Predicate | notableCase |
P4
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Arizona v. United States |
E4583
|
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: Arizona v. United States | Statement: [Donald B. Verrilli Jr., notableCase, Arizona v. United States]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Arizona v. United States Context triple: [Donald B. Verrilli Jr., notableCase, Arizona v. United States]
-
A.
Arizona v. United States
chosen
Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
-
B.
Arizona v. Johnson
Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
-
C.
Arizona v. Evans
Arizona v. Evans is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained through an arrest based on erroneous computer records.
-
D.
Washington v. Texas
Washington v. Texas is a 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held criminal defendants have a constitutional right to obtain testimony from favorable witnesses, incorporating the Compulsory Process Clause against the states.
-
E.
California v. Texas
California v. Texas is a U.S. Supreme Court case that challenged the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act after Congress reduced the individual mandate penalty to zero.
- 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_69d87f198bc48190a8b7e53ca15b7ead |
completed | April 10, 2026, 4:39 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e1ff68686481909517eed4266729ca |
completed | April 17, 2026, 9:37 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69ffeba007c08190bf4d3cf092abc7dd |
completed | May 10, 2026, 2:21 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 5 a.m.