Triple
T22297458
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India |
E551156
|
entity |
| Predicate | relatedLegislation |
P3136
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 |
—
|
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: Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 | Statement: [L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, relatedLegislation, Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 Context triple: [L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, relatedLegislation, Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985]
-
A.
Disputes Tribunals Act 1988
The Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 is New Zealand legislation that establishes and governs the operation, powers, and procedures of the Disputes Tribunal for resolving small civil claims in an accessible, low-cost forum.
-
B.
General Administrative Law Act
The General Administrative Law Act is a key Dutch statute that sets out the fundamental rules and procedures governing how public authorities make and review administrative decisions.
-
C.
Administrative Case Litigation Act
The Administrative Case Litigation Act is a Japanese statute that governs how individuals and entities can challenge administrative actions and decisions through lawsuits in the country’s courts.
-
D.
Ombudsmen Act 1975
The Ombudsmen Act 1975 is a New Zealand statute that establishes and governs the powers, functions, and jurisdiction of the Parliamentary Ombudsman to investigate complaints about government agencies.
-
E.
Rules of Decision Act
The Rules of Decision Act is a federal statute directing U.S. federal courts to apply state law as the rule of decision in certain civil cases, forming a key foundation for the Erie doctrine.
- 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: Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 Target entity description: The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 is an Indian law that establishes specialized tribunals to adjudicate disputes and complaints relating to the recruitment and service conditions of public servants, providing an alternative to traditional civil courts.
-
A.
Disputes Tribunals Act 1988
The Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 is New Zealand legislation that establishes and governs the operation, powers, and procedures of the Disputes Tribunal for resolving small civil claims in an accessible, low-cost forum.
-
B.
General Administrative Law Act
The General Administrative Law Act is a key Dutch statute that sets out the fundamental rules and procedures governing how public authorities make and review administrative decisions.
-
C.
Administrative Case Litigation Act
The Administrative Case Litigation Act is a Japanese statute that governs how individuals and entities can challenge administrative actions and decisions through lawsuits in the country’s courts.
-
D.
Ombudsmen Act 1975
The Ombudsmen Act 1975 is a New Zealand statute that establishes and governs the powers, functions, and jurisdiction of the Parliamentary Ombudsman to investigate complaints about government agencies.
-
E.
Rules of Decision Act
The Rules of Decision Act is a federal statute directing U.S. federal courts to apply state law as the rule of decision in certain civil cases, forming a key foundation for the Erie doctrine.
- 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_69e11e45fb848190a1b2ae21296e3a5f |
completed | April 16, 2026, 5:37 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f1572200c88190b9413286136fef15 |
completed | April 29, 2026, 12:56 a.m. |
Created at: April 16, 2026, 8:41 p.m.