Triple
T16599969
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988) |
E403304
|
entity |
| Predicate | priorCourtDisposition |
P123479
|
FINISHED |
| Object | judgment for defendant affirmed |
—
|
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: judgment for defendant affirmed | Statement: [West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988), priorCourtDisposition, judgment for defendant affirmed]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: priorCourtDisposition Context triple: [West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988), priorCourtDisposition, judgment for defendant affirmed]
-
A.
precedenceInCourt
Indicates that one legal case, decision, or action is considered to have higher authority or priority over another within a court’s decision-making process.
-
B.
decisionCourt
Indicates that a particular court rendered the decision or judgment in a given legal case or proceeding.
-
C.
laterCourt
Indicates that one court decision or proceeding occurs at a later time than another court decision or proceeding.
-
D.
predecessorCourtMentioned
Indicates that a court explicitly refers to or cites a decision from a predecessor court in its reasoning or judgment.
-
E.
courtOrdered
Indicates that an action, condition, or relationship exists because it has been formally mandated or imposed by a court order.
- F. None of above. chosen
Provenance (4 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_69d883880d0c81908b5fcd454e767b60 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 4:58 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e35d75772c8190b02aef02ea6788e1 |
completed | April 18, 2026, 10:31 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e296aabc508190b3836a91b49113ad |
completed | April 17, 2026, 8:23 p.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69e2d7fb02f481908885a226c2191231 |
completed | April 18, 2026, 1:01 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 5:16 a.m.