Triple

T13459456
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Frank Murphy E311320 entity
Predicate notableWork P4 FINISHED
Object opinion in Jones v. Opelika (dissent) E365014 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: opinion in Jones v. Opelika (dissent) | Statement: [Frank Murphy, notableWork, opinion in Jones v. Opelika (dissent)]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: opinion in Jones v. Opelika (dissent)
Context triple: [Frank Murphy, notableWork, opinion in Jones v. Opelika (dissent)]
  • A. Jones v. City of Opelika chosen
    Jones v. City of Opelika is a U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the constitutionality of municipal license taxes imposed on religious literature distributors, particularly Jehovah’s Witnesses, under the First Amendment.
  • B. Olmstead v. United States dissent
    The Olmstead v. United States dissent is Justice Louis D. Brandeis’s influential Supreme Court opinion arguing that wiretapping without a warrant violates constitutional privacy rights and foreshadowing modern interpretations of the Fourth Amendment.
  • C. Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action)
    Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action (dissent on affirmative action) is Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s powerful Supreme Court dissent criticizing a Michigan constitutional amendment that banned race-conscious admissions policies in public universities.
  • D. Opinion in Cooley v. Board of Wardens (1852)
    The Opinion in Cooley v. Board of Wardens (1852) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that helped define the scope of the Commerce Clause by allowing certain local regulations affecting interstate commerce when they address inherently local matters.
  • E. Supreme Court decision in City of Mobile v. Bolden
    The Supreme Court decision in City of Mobile v. Bolden was a 1980 ruling that required proof of discriminatory intent in voting rights cases, prompting Congress to amend the Voting Rights Act in 1982 to restore a results-based standard.
  • 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_69d806a938b8819097ec43a2229fc7f9 completed April 9, 2026, 8:06 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69dbaf0c177081909178dec61b09c278 completed April 12, 2026, 2:41 p.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69f739a001d08190ae5664c6670540e7 completed May 3, 2026, 12:03 p.m.
Created at: April 9, 2026, 9:41 p.m.