Triple

T20023657
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Bivens doctrine E494921 entity
Predicate subjectOf P38 FINISHED
Object Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017) 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: Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017) | Statement: [Bivens doctrine, subjectOf, Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017)]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017)
Context triple: [Bivens doctrine, subjectOf, Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017)]
  • A. Zubik v. Burwell
    Zubik v. Burwell is a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning religious nonprofits’ objections to the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive coverage mandate and the accommodation process for opting out.
  • B. Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda
    Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal employment discrimination law protects gay and lesbian employees from being fired because of their sexual orientation.
  • C. Patchak v. Zinke
    Patchak v. Zinke is a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed Congress’s power to strip federal courts of jurisdiction over pending lawsuits without violating the Constitution’s separation of powers.
  • D. Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer
    Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that Congress may, under its Fourteenth Amendment enforcement powers, authorize private lawsuits for money damages against state governments despite Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity.
  • E. Argersinger v. Hamlin
    Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
  • 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: Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017)
Target entity description: Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U.S. 120 (2017), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision that sharply limited the availability of implied damages actions against federal officials under the Bivens doctrine, especially in national security and immigration detention contexts.
  • A. Zubik v. Burwell
    Zubik v. Burwell is a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning religious nonprofits’ objections to the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive coverage mandate and the accommodation process for opting out.
  • B. Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda
    Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal employment discrimination law protects gay and lesbian employees from being fired because of their sexual orientation.
  • C. Patchak v. Zinke
    Patchak v. Zinke is a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed Congress’s power to strip federal courts of jurisdiction over pending lawsuits without violating the Constitution’s separation of powers.
  • D. Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer
    Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that Congress may, under its Fourteenth Amendment enforcement powers, authorize private lawsuits for money damages against state governments despite Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity.
  • E. Argersinger v. Hamlin
    Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
  • 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_69da626bfd288190aa5d65098b6433ae completed April 11, 2026, 3:02 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69e6628a1ecc8190bf6ee0bedb61e0b8 completed April 20, 2026, 5:29 p.m.
Created at: April 11, 2026, 3:35 p.m.