Triple
T2682401
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Alabama v. Shelton |
E57401
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasPrecedentFor |
P3138
|
FINISHED |
| Object | right to counsel in misdemeanor cases with suspended sentences |
—
|
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: right to counsel in misdemeanor cases with suspended sentences | Statement: [Alabama v. Shelton, hasPrecedentFor, right to counsel in misdemeanor cases with suspended sentences]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasPrecedentFor Context triple: [Alabama v. Shelton, hasPrecedentFor, right to counsel in misdemeanor cases with suspended sentences]
-
A.
hasCourtPrecedence
Indicates that one court decision or ruling holds authoritative priority over another in legal reasoning or application.
-
B.
precedentFor
chosen
Indicates that one situation, decision, or case serves as an authoritative example or basis for deciding or interpreting another.
-
C.
wasPrecededBy
Indicates that one event, state, or entity occurred or existed earlier in time than another.
-
D.
hasPrecedentialStatus
Indicates that one legal decision or authority possesses a recognized level of precedential force or binding effect relative to others.
-
E.
precedentInterpreted
Indicates that one legal precedent is interpreted or understood in a particular way, often as clarified or applied in subsequent decisions or analyses.
- 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_69ab4a5028388190a36f3baf1588309e |
completed | March 6, 2026, 9:42 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69abd9d602848190b638e417e710a555 |
completed | March 7, 2026, 7:55 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69abd81c9b4c81908e5e0da6ac5f828b |
completed | March 7, 2026, 7:47 a.m. |
Created at: March 6, 2026, 9:54 p.m.