Triple
T1708743
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Louis D. Brandeis |
E36929
|
entity |
| Predicate | notableWork |
P4
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Brandeis Brief in Muller v. Oregon |
E193550
|
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: Brandeis Brief in Muller v. Oregon | Statement: [Louis D. Brandeis, notableWork, Brandeis Brief in Muller v. Oregon]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Brandeis Brief in Muller v. Oregon Context triple: [Louis D. Brandeis, notableWork, Brandeis Brief in Muller v. Oregon]
-
A.
Muller v. Oregon brief
The Muller v. Oregon brief is a landmark 1908 legal document, authored by Louis D. Brandeis, that pioneered the use of extensive social science data to defend labor regulations, particularly limiting women’s working hours.
-
B.
Brandenburg v. Ohio
Brandenburg v. Ohio is a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly strengthened free speech protections by establishing the "imminent lawless action" test for when advocacy of violence can be punished under the First Amendment.
-
C.
Brandeis Brief
chosen
The Brandeis Brief is a pioneering legal document that introduced extensive social science and empirical data into constitutional law arguments, transforming how courts consider evidence beyond purely legal precedents.
-
D.
De Jonge v. Oregon
De Jonge v. Oregon is a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the right to peaceful assembly is a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus applies to the states.
-
E.
Printz v. United States
Printz v. United States is a 1997 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited federal power by holding that Congress cannot compel state or local officials to implement federal regulatory programs.
- 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_69a88617439c819094ffb5d16a0f6307 |
completed | March 4, 2026, 7:20 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69aa63118618819085700fa84e362d60 |
completed | March 6, 2026, 5:16 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69ada0d1882c81908e02e36ab28e7fdc |
completed | March 8, 2026, 4:16 p.m. |
Created at: March 4, 2026, 7:30 p.m.