Triple

T587462
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Cantwell v. Connecticut E15188 entity
Predicate relatedCase P3137 FINISHED
Object Reynolds v. United States E5191 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: Reynolds v. United States | Statement: [Cantwell v. Connecticut, relatedCase, Reynolds v. United States]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Reynolds v. United States
Context triple: [Cantwell v. Connecticut, relatedCase, Reynolds v. United States]
  • A. Reynolds v. United States chosen
    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.
  • B. Abrams v. United States
    Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
  • C. Printz v. United States
    Printz v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited federal power by holding that Congress cannot compel state or local officials to implement federal regulatory programs.
  • D. Dickerson v. United States
    Dickerson v. United States is a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court case that reaffirmed the constitutional basis of Miranda warnings and held that Congress could not overrule Miranda v. Arizona by statute.
  • 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 (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_69a4935783b8819082b77726ec10cc42 completed March 1, 2026, 7:28 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69a49b9bf0cc8190a145ccd6fc501349 completed March 1, 2026, 8:03 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69a5155210dc8190bad32b49703641e2 completed March 2, 2026, 4:42 a.m.
Created at: March 1, 2026, 7:33 p.m.