Triple
T14311824
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Erie doctrine |
E354850
|
entity |
| Predicate | clarifiedByCase |
P13052
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Hanna v. Plumer |
E354848
|
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: Hanna v. Plumer | Statement: [Erie doctrine, clarifiedByCase, Hanna v. Plumer]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Hanna v. Plumer Context triple: [Erie doctrine, clarifiedByCase, Hanna v. Plumer]
-
A.
Hanna v. Plumer
chosen
Hanna v. Plumer is a 1965 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified the application of the Erie doctrine by holding that valid Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern over conflicting state procedural laws in federal diversity actions.
-
B.
Hudson v. Palmer
Hudson v. Palmer is a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held prisoners have no reasonable expectation of privacy in their cells under the Fourth Amendment.
-
C.
Argersinger v. Hamlin
Argersinger v. Hamlin is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the right to counsel to defendants in misdemeanor cases that may result in imprisonment.
-
D.
Shaw v. Hunt
Shaw v. Hunt is a 1996 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the Court’s racial gerrymandering jurisprudence by applying and extending the principles first articulated in Shaw v. Reno.
-
E.
Hurd v. Hodge
Hurd v. Hodge is a 1948 U.S. Supreme Court case that held racially restrictive covenants in property deeds could not be judicially enforced in the District of Columbia because such enforcement would violate the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
- 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_69d8278ed42c8190b9f882dcce611347 |
completed | April 9, 2026, 10:26 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69de85b386d0819087d14f3ce84a1997 |
completed | April 14, 2026, 6:21 p.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69fd4684e2648190b46328252ac9d51b |
completed | May 8, 2026, 2:12 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 1:12 a.m.