Triple
T17480146
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Hudgens v. NLRB |
E425633
|
entity |
| Predicate | distinguishes |
P6335
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Marsh v. Alabama |
—
|
NE NERFINISHED |
How this triple was built (3 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: Marsh v. Alabama | Statement: [Hudgens v. NLRB, distinguishes, Marsh v. Alabama]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Marsh v. Alabama Context triple: [Hudgens v. NLRB, distinguishes, Marsh v. Alabama]
-
A.
Swain v. Alabama
Swain v. Alabama was a 1965 U.S. Supreme Court decision that set a high evidentiary bar for proving racial discrimination in jury selection, later overturned by Batson v. Kentucky.
-
B.
Stone v. Mississippi
Stone v. Mississippi is an 1880 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a state cannot irrevocably surrender its police power, allowing Mississippi to prohibit a previously chartered lottery despite contractual claims.
-
C.
Hamilton v. Alabama
Hamilton v. Alabama is a 1961 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held an indigent defendant in a capital case has a constitutional right to counsel at arraignment, treating that stage as a critical point in the criminal process.
-
D.
Brown v. Mississippi
Brown v. Mississippi is a landmark 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that held convictions based solely on confessions extracted by police torture violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
E.
Jackson v. Georgia
Jackson v. Georgia is a United States Supreme Court case that, alongside Furman v. Georgia, addressed the constitutionality and application of the death penalty under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Marsh v. Alabama Target entity description: Marsh v. Alabama is a 1946 U.S. Supreme Court case holding that a privately owned company town could not prohibit the distribution of religious literature on its sidewalks because they functioned like public streets under the First Amendment.
-
A.
Swain v. Alabama
Swain v. Alabama was a 1965 U.S. Supreme Court decision that set a high evidentiary bar for proving racial discrimination in jury selection, later overturned by Batson v. Kentucky.
-
B.
Stone v. Mississippi
Stone v. Mississippi is an 1880 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a state cannot irrevocably surrender its police power, allowing Mississippi to prohibit a previously chartered lottery despite contractual claims.
-
C.
Hamilton v. Alabama
Hamilton v. Alabama is a 1961 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held an indigent defendant in a capital case has a constitutional right to counsel at arraignment, treating that stage as a critical point in the criminal process.
-
D.
Brown v. Mississippi
Brown v. Mississippi is a landmark 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that held convictions based solely on confessions extracted by police torture violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
E.
Jackson v. Georgia
Jackson v. Georgia is a United States Supreme Court case that, alongside Furman v. Georgia, addressed the constitutionality and application of the death penalty under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
- F. None of above. chosen
Provenance (2 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_69d889dbc2e88190b18ea6115e819258 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 5:25 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e451bf1e8081909f4d4b8992412e62 |
completed | April 19, 2026, 3:53 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 5:48 a.m.