Triple

T21620184
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 E533554 entity
Predicate relatedCaseLaw P3137 FINISHED
Object Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (as background on basic structure doctrine) — NE NERFINISHED

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 (as background on basic structure doctrine) | Statement: [Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, relatedCaseLaw, Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (as background on basic structure doctrine)]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (as background on basic structure doctrine)
Context triple: [Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, relatedCaseLaw, Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (as background on basic structure doctrine)]
  • 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. 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.
  • E. M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra
    M. P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra is a 1954 Supreme Court of India judgment that had denied the existence of a fundamental right to privacy under the Indian Constitution, a position later overruled by the landmark Puttaswamy decision.
  • F. None of above.
  • G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

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_69e0c464fba881908d0ff2ac80511ce1 completed April 16, 2026, 11:13 a.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69ef3baeeae48190b78583b3bec8ee33 completed April 27, 2026, 10:34 a.m.
Created at: April 16, 2026, 6:34 p.m.