Triple
T25092525
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Keech v Sandford |
E628500
|
entity |
| Predicate | legalPrincipleType |
P4756
|
FINISHED |
| Object | no-conflict rule |
—
|
LITERAL 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: no-conflict rule | Statement: [Keech v Sandford, legalPrincipleType, no-conflict rule]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: legalPrincipleType Context triple: [Keech v Sandford, legalPrincipleType, no-conflict rule]
-
A.
legalCodeType
Indicates the specific category or classification of a legal code that applies to an entity or situation.
-
B.
typeOfLaw
Indicates that one entity is a specific category or kind of law to which the other entity pertains.
-
C.
legalStandardType
Indicates the specific type or category of legal standard that governs or applies to a given legal rule, decision, or evaluation.
-
D.
legalConcept
Indicates a relationship where something is classified or treated as a concept defined and governed by law or legal theory.
-
E.
legalDoctrine
chosen
Indicates that one legal principle, rule, or theory is being applied, referenced, or relied upon as an authoritative basis for interpreting or deciding a legal issue.
- F. None of above.
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_69e2ff2f58e881908340527bc5d34f07 |
completed | April 18, 2026, 3:49 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f6352fdb788190b9bad30243690743 |
completed | May 2, 2026, 5:32 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69f63182f1408190bddc1214fcbd6145 |
completed | May 2, 2026, 5:16 p.m. |
Created at: April 18, 2026, 6:24 a.m.