Triple
T36011621
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo |
E1041725
|
entity |
| Predicate | precedentFollowed |
P163883
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Adkins v. Children’s Hospital |
E140388
|
NE 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: Adkins v. Children’s Hospital | Statement: [Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo, precedentFollowed, Adkins v. Children’s Hospital]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: precedentFollowed Context triple: [Morehead v. New York ex rel. Tipaldo, precedentFollowed, Adkins v. Children’s Hospital]
-
A.
precedentFor
Indicates that one situation, decision, or case serves as an authoritative example or basis for deciding or interpreting another.
-
B.
subsequentCitationAsPrecedentFor
chosen
Indicates that one citation is used later as a precedent or authoritative basis for another citation or legal decision.
-
C.
precedentInterpreted
Indicates that one legal precedent is interpreted or understood in a particular way, often as clarified or applied in subsequent decisions or analyses.
-
D.
wasPrecededBy
Indicates that one event, state, or entity occurred or existed earlier in time than another.
-
E.
modifiedPrecedent
Indicates that one entity has altered, qualified, or changed the terms, scope, or interpretation of a prior decision, rule, or precedent.
- F. None of above.
Provenance (4 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_69f76e2b981881908e4e160607fa82eb |
completed | May 3, 2026, 3:47 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69fdb04ed81c8190b8feea90c1c785a6 |
completed | May 8, 2026, 9:43 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_6a38cb8bb1748190853aad4aa3623d68 |
completed | June 22, 2026, 5:43 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69fda9d6c5148190a63205b6d9b0a1b4 |
completed | May 8, 2026, 9:16 a.m. |
Created at: May 3, 2026, 4:07 p.m.