Triple

T1567799
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Public Law 103-141 E33470 entity
Predicate relatedCase P3137 FINISHED
Object Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) E14513 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: Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) | Statement: [Public Law 103-141, relatedCase, Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07 
Target entity: Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)
Context triple: [Public Law 103-141, relatedCase, Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)]
  • A. Employment Division v. Smith chosen
    Employment Division v. Smith is a landmark 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed protections for religious practices under the Free Exercise Clause by upholding the enforcement of neutral, generally applicable laws even when they incidentally burden religion.
  • B. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon
    Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon is a state agency responsible for administering employment-related services and regulations in Oregon, including unemployment insurance and workforce programs.
  • C. Griggs v. Duke Power Co.
    Griggs v. Duke Power Co. is a 1971 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the doctrine of disparate impact in employment discrimination law, holding that seemingly neutral job requirements that disproportionately exclude protected groups can violate Title VII.
  • D. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
    Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowed the standards for proving employment discrimination under Title VII, prompting Congress to later revise those standards in the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
  • E. Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda
    Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that held federal employment discrimination law protects gay and lesbian employees from being fired because of their sexual orientation.
  • 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_69a885f11b048190935025a035302715 completed March 4, 2026, 7:20 p.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69a908a0314c8190a5ce3e32dd9035db completed March 5, 2026, 4:37 a.m.
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) batch_69ad4023da008190a947cf0d2983df2e completed March 8, 2026, 9:23 a.m.
Created at: March 4, 2026, 7:27 p.m.