Triple

T2128558
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Ernesto Arturo Miranda E46480 entity
Predicate associatedLegalDoctrine P4756 FINISHED
Object Miranda rights E8268 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: Miranda rights | Statement: [Ernesto Arturo Miranda, associatedLegalDoctrine, Miranda rights]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Miranda rights
Context triple: [Ernesto Arturo Miranda, associatedLegalDoctrine, Miranda rights]
  • A. Miranda v. Arizona chosen
    Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the requirement for police to inform criminal suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during custodial interrogations.
  • B. Smith Act
    The Smith Act is a 1940 U.S. federal law that criminalized advocating the violent overthrow of the government and was widely used during the early Cold War to prosecute suspected communists.
  • C. U.S. Constitution, Sixth Amendment
    The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees criminal defendants rights such as a speedy and public trial, an impartial jury, notice of accusations, confrontation of witnesses, compulsory process for obtaining witnesses, and the assistance of counsel.
  • D. Mapp v. Ohio
    Mapp v. Ohio is a landmark 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case that applied the exclusionary rule to the states, holding that evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment cannot be used in state criminal prosecutions.
  • E. Strickland v. Washington
    Strickland v. Washington is a landmark 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the two-pronged test for determining when a criminal defendant’s right to effective assistance of counsel has been violated.
  • 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_69a88a1626548190ae59a5028c3baa8e completed March 4, 2026, 7:37 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69abbb7659f48190871cb27faf47e18a completed March 7, 2026, 5:45 a.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69ae58d10bec8190bf21718649552118 completed March 9, 2026, 5:21 a.m.
Created at: March 4, 2026, 7:44 p.m.