Triple
T10868301
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | N.Y. Ct. App. |
E256580
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasPrecedentAuthority |
P40251
|
FINISHED |
| Object | binding on all New York state courts |
—
|
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: binding on all New York state courts | Statement: [N.Y. Ct. App., hasPrecedentAuthority, binding on all New York state courts]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: hasPrecedentAuthority Context triple: [N.Y. Ct. App., hasPrecedentAuthority, binding on all New York state courts]
-
A.
hasCourtPrecedence
Indicates that one court decision or ruling holds authoritative priority over another in legal reasoning or application.
-
B.
hasPrecedentialStatus
chosen
Indicates that one legal decision or authority possesses a recognized level of precedential force or binding effect relative to others.
-
C.
precedentFor
Indicates that one situation, decision, or case serves as an authoritative example or basis for deciding or interpreting another.
-
D.
createdInstitutionalPrecedentFor
Indicates that one action, decision, or event established a formal example or standard that later guided or constrained institutional behavior, rules, or practices for another.
-
E.
legalPrecedentInvolved
Indicates that a particular legal precedent (prior court decision or ruling) is relevant to, cited in, or forms the basis for the current legal matter or action.
- F. None of above.
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_69d6aa83d1448190a66d93c32394d21f |
completed | April 8, 2026, 7:20 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69d7516f9b08819096b9438878bf36c9 |
completed | April 9, 2026, 7:12 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69d70d308dfc81908792f98cfb871392 |
completed | April 9, 2026, 2:21 a.m. |
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:20 p.m.