Triple
T1349122
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Baker v. Nelson |
E28840
|
entity |
| Predicate | precedentialEffect |
P3138
|
FINISHED |
| Object | binding summary disposition on lower federal courts at the time |
—
|
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 summary disposition on lower federal courts at the time | Statement: [Baker v. Nelson, precedentialEffect, binding summary disposition on lower federal courts at the time]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: precedentialEffect Context triple: [Baker v. Nelson, precedentialEffect, binding summary disposition on lower federal courts at the time]
-
A.
precedentInterpreted
Indicates that one legal precedent is interpreted or understood in a particular way, often as clarified or applied in subsequent decisions or analyses.
-
B.
confersPrecedenceIn
Indicates that one entity is granted higher priority, rank, or standing over another within a specified context or domain.
-
C.
precedentFor
chosen
Indicates that one situation, decision, or case serves as an authoritative example or basis for deciding or interpreting another.
-
D.
hasCourtPrecedence
Indicates that one court decision or ruling holds authoritative priority over another in legal reasoning or application.
-
E.
precedentSystem
Indicates that one legal system or framework serves as a source of precedent or authoritative guidance for another system.
- 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_69a498571d248190a0ac9eb02d97097f |
completed | March 1, 2026, 7:49 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69a4c268745481908be649526c18e558 |
completed | March 1, 2026, 10:49 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69a4bef5857c81909ae984feb85a26ca |
completed | March 1, 2026, 10:34 p.m. |
Created at: March 1, 2026, 7:56 p.m.