Triple
T1349134
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Baker v. Nelson |
E28840
|
entity |
| Predicate | precedentStatusBeforeObergefell |
P18766
|
FINISHED |
| Object | treated as controlling on same-sex marriage claims by many lower courts |
—
|
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: treated as controlling on same-sex marriage claims by many lower courts | Statement: [Baker v. Nelson, precedentStatusBeforeObergefell, treated as controlling on same-sex marriage claims by many lower courts]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: precedentStatusBeforeObergefell Context triple: [Baker v. Nelson, precedentStatusBeforeObergefell, treated as controlling on same-sex marriage claims by many lower courts]
-
A.
hasCourtPrecedence
chosen
Indicates that one court decision or ruling holds authoritative priority over another in legal reasoning or application.
-
B.
hasStatusAfterDobbs
Indicates that an entity’s status or condition is defined or evaluated specifically in the period after the Dobbs decision.
-
C.
precedentChallenged
Indicates that an existing legal precedent is being questioned, disputed, or formally contested.
-
D.
precedentFor
Indicates that one situation, decision, or case serves as an authoritative example or basis for deciding or interpreting another.
-
E.
precedentStatusOfGrovey v. Townsend
Indicates the legal precedent status that the case Grovey v. Townsend holds in relation to other cases or legal questions.
- 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.