Triple
T10430587
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Direct Tax Clause of the United States Constitution |
E245901
|
entity |
| Predicate | interpretedInCase |
P2252
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Hylton v. United States |
E48110
|
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: Hylton v. United States | Statement: [Direct Tax Clause of the United States Constitution, interpretedInCase, Hylton v. United States]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Hylton v. United States Context triple: [Direct Tax Clause of the United States Constitution, interpretedInCase, Hylton v. United States]
-
A.
Hylton v. United States
chosen
Hylton v. United States was an 1796 U.S. Supreme Court case that is historically significant as one of the Court’s earliest exercises of judicial review in upholding a federal tax on carriages.
-
B.
Ware v. Hylton
Ware v. Hylton was a 1796 U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal treaties override conflicting state laws, helping to establish the authority of the national government under the Constitution.
-
C.
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.
-
D.
Herring v. United States
Herring v. United States is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that further limited the application of the exclusionary rule by holding that evidence need not be suppressed when obtained through isolated police negligence rather than deliberate or reckless misconduct.
-
E.
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.
- 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_69d381bf3dc08190bf35a2643e4e8f22 |
completed | April 6, 2026, 9:49 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69d4ea62d6448190a7f5b785467824cf |
completed | April 7, 2026, 11:28 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69d87eb068bc8190be9c7c916850278e |
completed | April 10, 2026, 4:38 a.m. |
Created at: April 6, 2026, 12:13 p.m.