Triple

T1341811
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Carter v. Carter Coal Co. E28480 entity
Predicate fullName P16 FINISHED
Object Carter v. Carter Coal Company E28480 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: Carter v. Carter Coal Company | Statement: [Carter v. Carter Coal Co., fullName, Carter v. Carter Coal Company]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Carter v. Carter Coal Company
Context triple: [Carter v. Carter Coal Co., fullName, Carter v. Carter Coal Company]
  • A. Carter v. Carter Coal Co. chosen
    Carter v. Carter Coal Co. was a 1936 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down federal regulation of coal production as an unconstitutional overreach of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers.
  • B. 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.
  • C. Briggs v. Elliott
    Briggs v. Elliott was a landmark federal court case from South Carolina challenging racial segregation in public schools, and it became one of the key cases consolidated into Brown v. Board of Education.
  • D. Corfield v. Coryell
    Corfield v. Coryell is an 1823 federal circuit court decision by Justice Bushrod Washington that famously articulated an influential early list of the fundamental rights protected by the U.S. Constitution’s Privileges and Immunities Clause.
  • E. Mathews v. Eldridge
    Mathews v. Eldridge is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established a three-factor balancing test for determining what procedural safeguards due process requires in administrative proceedings.
  • 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_69a49854eb3481908c7d56b2e449a290 completed March 1, 2026, 7:49 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69a4c215fc008190b01fd8150b9f3b2a completed March 1, 2026, 10:47 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69acc632cbc88190a64897f1b101c699 completed March 8, 2026, 12:43 a.m.
Created at: March 1, 2026, 7:56 p.m.