Triple

T8252783
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Myers v. United States E192995 entity
Predicate dissentingJusticesCount P81204 FINISHED
Object 3 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: 3 | Statement: [Myers v. United States, dissentingJusticesCount, 3]
PD Predicate disambiguation gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: dissentingJusticesCount
Context triple: [Myers v. United States, dissentingJusticesCount, 3]
  • A. hasDissentingJustice
    Indicates that within a judicial decision or ruling, there exists at least one justice who formally disagrees with the majority opinion.
  • B. dissentingJustice
    Indicates that a particular justice disagrees with the majority opinion or decision in a legal case.
  • C. hasConcurringJustice
    Indicates that a judicial decision is associated with a justice who wrote or joined a concurring opinion.
  • D. pluralityJustices
    Indicates that the referenced justices formed a plurality—receiving more support than any other opinion but not a majority—in a judicial decision.
  • E. majorityJustices
    Indicates that the referenced justices constitute more than half of the members of the relevant court or judicial panel in a given decision or context.
  • F. None of above. chosen

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_69ca82dfad9c8190b8cd18fb89f50f40 completed March 30, 2026, 2:04 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69cb78cbc7cc81909931440e95d6e691 completed March 31, 2026, 7:33 a.m.
PD Predicate disambiguation batch_69cb36b6d5548190b665a6cce14c69f7 completed March 31, 2026, 2:51 a.m.
PDg Predicate description generation batch_69cb44d1caa881909069fa925a91316b completed March 31, 2026, 3:51 a.m.
Created at: March 30, 2026, 5:48 p.m.