Triple
T11026513
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Christopher Eckhardt |
E260636
|
entity |
| Predicate | legalCaseHeParticipatedInDecisionYear |
P97353
|
FINISHED |
| Object | 1969 |
—
|
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: 1969 | Statement: [Christopher Eckhardt, legalCaseHeParticipatedInDecisionYear, 1969]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: legalCaseHeParticipatedInDecisionYear Context triple: [Christopher Eckhardt, legalCaseHeParticipatedInDecisionYear, 1969]
-
A.
judgmentInvolves
Indicates that a particular judgment, decision, or legal ruling includes, concerns, or pertains to a specified entity or matter.
-
B.
notableCaseYear
Indicates the year in which a particular case became notable or gained recognized significance.
-
C.
legalCase
Indicates a relationship where a formal legal dispute or proceeding exists between parties, typically adjudicated by a court or similar authority.
-
D.
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.
-
E.
limitedByCourtCaseYear
Indicates that the applicability or validity of something is constrained or restricted based on the year of a specific court case.
- 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_69d6aa9687448190b28d353b1b6a610e |
completed | April 8, 2026, 7:20 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69d797d0cd988190a7b21d7bdc3109ce |
completed | April 9, 2026, 12:13 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69d7440087ac8190aef2e6f6b13b2635 |
completed | April 9, 2026, 6:15 a.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69d750c99f9881908ee2b01b6ce4b3a1 |
completed | April 9, 2026, 7:10 a.m. |
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:25 p.m.