Triple
T16151614
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | New York Criminal Anarchy Law |
E391922
|
entity |
| Predicate | legalDoctrineInfluence |
P13177
|
FINISHED |
| Object | bad tendency test |
—
|
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: bad tendency test | Statement: [New York Criminal Anarchy Law, legalDoctrineInfluence, bad tendency test]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: legalDoctrineInfluence Context triple: [New York Criminal Anarchy Law, legalDoctrineInfluence, bad tendency test]
-
A.
legalDoctrineInfluenced
chosen
Indicates that one legal doctrine has shaped, informed, or contributed to the development or interpretation of another legal doctrine.
-
B.
legalDoctrine
Indicates that one legal principle, rule, or theory is being applied, referenced, or relied upon as an authoritative basis for interpreting or deciding a legal issue.
-
C.
legalTraditionInfluenced
Indicates that one legal tradition has had a formative or shaping influence on the development, principles, or practices of another legal tradition.
-
D.
courtInfluence
Indicates that one party exerts or holds influence over decisions, outcomes, or behavior within a court or judicial setting.
-
E.
legalDoctrineChallenged
Indicates that a particular legal doctrine is being disputed, questioned, or contested, typically through litigation or formal legal argument.
- 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_69d87f1c65e48190aa2b4c472e9bafc4 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 4:39 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e21d981950819087fdacc7879dca97 |
completed | April 17, 2026, 11:46 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e1828abb608190a99d86bce1d77de2 |
completed | April 17, 2026, 12:44 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 5:01 a.m.