Triple
T16599985
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988) |
E403304
|
entity |
| Predicate | officialCitationFormat |
P53709
|
FINISHED |
| Object | West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988) |
E403304
|
NE FINISHED |
Disambiguation candidates (2 decisions)
The exact options the model was shown at each disambiguation step, with the option it chose highlighted — the evidence behind this triple's disambiguated ids.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988) Context triple: [West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988), officialCitationFormat, West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988)]
-
A.
West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988)
chosen
West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that a private physician under contract to provide medical services to state prisoners acts under color of state law for purposes of liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
-
B.
Atkins v. Virginia
Atkins v. Virginia is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held executing individuals with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
-
C.
Lockett v. Ohio
Lockett v. Ohio is a 1978 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly expanded the range of mitigating factors a sentencer must be allowed to consider before imposing the death penalty.
-
D.
opinion in Atkins v. Virginia
The opinion in Atkins v. Virginia is a landmark 2002 U.S. Supreme Court decision, authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, that held executing individuals with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
-
E.
Rochin v. California
Rochin v. California is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that held evidence obtained by methods that "shock the conscience," such as forcibly pumping a suspect’s stomach, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- F. None of above.
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: officialCitationFormat Context triple: [West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988), officialCitationFormat, West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 (1988)]
-
A.
legalCitationForm
chosen
Indicates the standardized way in which a legal authority (such as a case, statute, or regulation) should be cited in legal documents.
-
B.
originalCitationForm
Indicates the relationship where one form of a cited work is the initial or primary version from which other citation forms or variants are derived.
-
C.
citationFormatIncludes
Indicates that a particular citation format specification contains or incorporates a given element, rule, or component as part of its structure.
-
D.
formerLegalCitation
Indicates that one legal citation previously referred to or governed a matter but has since been replaced, superseded, or is no longer the current controlling citation.
-
E.
usesCitationFormat
Indicates that one entity applies or follows a specific citation or referencing format defined by another entity.
- F. None of above.
Provenance (4 batches)
| Stage | Batch ID | Job type | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| creating | batch_69d883880d0c81908b5fcd454e767b60 |
elicitation | completed |
| NER | batch_69e35d75772c8190b02aef02ea6788e1 |
ner | completed |
| NED1 | batch_6a0075a48c088190b6585e42dcd73705 |
ned_source_triple | completed |
| PD | batch_69e296aabc508190b3836a91b49113ad |
pd | completed |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 5:16 a.m.