Triple

T5879123
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject opinion in Ginzburg v. United States E130699 entity
Predicate relatedCase P3137 FINISHED
Object Roth v. United States E130035 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: Roth v. United States | Statement: [opinion in Ginzburg v. United States, relatedCase, Roth v. United States]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Roth v. United States
Context triple: [opinion in Ginzburg v. United States, relatedCase, Roth v. United States]
  • A. Roth v. United States chosen
    Roth v. United States is a landmark 1957 U.S. Supreme Court decision that redefined the legal standard for obscenity under the First Amendment.
  • B. Reynolds v. United States
    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.
  • C. Olmstead v. United States
    Olmstead v. United States was a 1928 U.S. Supreme Court case that held warrantless wiretapping did not violate the Fourth Amendment, a stance later curtailed by modern privacy jurisprudence.
  • D. Katz v. United States
    Katz v. United States is a landmark 1967 Supreme Court case that redefined Fourth Amendment protections by establishing that the amendment safeguards people’s reasonable expectations of privacy, not just physical places.
  • E. Yates v. United States
    Yates v. United States is a 1957 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed the application of the Smith Act by distinguishing between the advocacy of abstract doctrine and the advocacy of concrete action to overthrow the government.
  • 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_69c0085523688190bfd487479ce819e6 completed March 22, 2026, 3:18 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69c036327efc8190858e9364cd5d317b completed March 22, 2026, 6:34 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69c0b12d9e348190b4baf171ce448d5b completed March 23, 2026, 3:19 a.m.
Created at: March 22, 2026, 3:57 p.m.