Triple

T22061315
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Olmstead v. United States E545157 entity
Predicate relatedCase P3137 FINISHED
Object Goldman v. United States — 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: Goldman v. United States | Statement: [Olmstead v. United States, relatedCase, Goldman v. United States]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Goldman v. United States
Context triple: [Olmstead v. United States, relatedCase, Goldman v. United States]
  • A. Goldman v. United States chosen
    Goldman v. United States is a 1942 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld warrantless electronic eavesdropping based on a narrow, property-based interpretation of the Fourth Amendment, later limited by the Court’s shift to a privacy-based approach.
  • B. Gall v. United States
    Gall v. United States is a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified federal sentencing discretion by holding that appellate courts must review all sentences, including those outside the Sentencing Guidelines, under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.
  • C. Reynolds v. United States
    Reynolds v. United States is an 1879 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the distinction between protected religious belief and regulable religiously motivated conduct, holding that the Free Exercise Clause does not excuse individuals from compliance with otherwise valid criminal laws such as those banning polygamy.
  • D. Durousseau v. United States
    Durousseau v. United States is an 1810 U.S. Supreme Court decision that clarified the scope of federal judicial power by interpreting Congress’s authority to make exceptions and regulations to the Court’s appellate jurisdiction.
  • E. Bond v. United States
    Bond v. United States is a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified an individual’s ability to raise Tenth Amendment challenges to federal statutes, reinforcing limits on federal power in favor of state sovereignty.
  • 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_69e11e3377c48190890c17407b9527d6 completed April 16, 2026, 5:36 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69f1285d5e508190b3124a70fe55b32e completed April 28, 2026, 9:36 p.m.
Created at: April 16, 2026, 8:27 p.m.