Triple

T11393019
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject The First Amendment did not bar prosecution of the defendant's antiwar publications under the circumstances of the case E269893 entity
Predicate isCentralHoldingOf P4408 FINISHED
Object Frohwerk v. United States E55132 NE FINISHED

How this triple was built (3 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: Frohwerk v. United States | Statement: [The First Amendment did not bar prosecution of the defendant's antiwar publications under the circumstances of the case, isCentralHoldingOf, Frohwerk v. United States]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Frohwerk v. United States
Context triple: [The First Amendment did not bar prosecution of the defendant's antiwar publications under the circumstances of the case, isCentralHoldingOf, Frohwerk v. United States]
  • A. Frohwerk v. United States chosen
    Frohwerk v. United States is a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld a conviction for antiwar newspaper articles, reinforcing broad federal power to punish speech deemed obstructive to World War I military recruitment.
  • B. Wright v. United States
    Wright v. United States is a 1938 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the scope of presidential veto power and the constitutional requirements for lawmaking under the Presentment Clause.
  • C. Abrams v. United States
    Abrams v. United States was a 1919 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the conviction of antiwar activists under federal law and is best known for Justice Holmes’s famous dissent articulating the “marketplace of ideas” concept in free speech jurisprudence.
  • D. Carpenter v. United States
    Carpenter v. United States is a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held the government generally must obtain a warrant to access historical cell phone location records under the Fourth Amendment.
  • E. United States v. Darby
    United States v. Darby is a 1941 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld federal labor regulations under the Commerce Clause and marked a broad expansion of federal power over economic activity.
  • F. None of above.
  • G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
PD Predicate disambiguation gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: isCentralHoldingOf
Context triple: [The First Amendment did not bar prosecution of the defendant's antiwar publications under the circumstances of the case, isCentralHoldingOf, Frohwerk v. United States]
  • A. isCentralTo chosen
    Indicates that something plays a primary, essential, or defining role in relation to something else, such that the latter depends on or is organized around it.
  • B. isCentralHubOf
    Indicates that one entity functions as the primary connecting or coordinating hub for activities, resources, or interactions among multiple other entities.
  • C. hasJurisdictionalCenter
    Indicates that an administrative or legal authority is associated with a specific central location from which its jurisdiction is exercised or managed.
  • D. isCentralLocalityOf
    Indicates that a locality serves as the main or central place within a larger administrative or geographic area.
  • E. hasCentralAct
    Indicates that an entity includes or is characterized by a primary or most important action, event, or operation at its core.
  • F. None of above.

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_69d6aacdbc6c8190af6dc3d5f5d22836 completed April 8, 2026, 7:21 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69d8001796f48190822526f52e3f0337 completed April 9, 2026, 7:37 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69e5e8cc338081908da977b5b7c6bef3 completed April 20, 2026, 8:50 a.m.
PD Predicate disambiguation batch_69d7e70b228c8190b87f5101fd683788 completed April 9, 2026, 5:51 p.m.
Created at: April 8, 2026, 9:34 p.m.