Triple
T17234823
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Y. V. Chandrachud |
E418330
|
entity |
| Predicate | notableWork |
P4
|
FINISHED |
| Object | judgment in Minerva Mills v. Union of India |
E547317
|
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: judgment in Minerva Mills v. Union of India | Statement: [Y. V. Chandrachud, notableWork, judgment in Minerva Mills v. Union of India]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: judgment in Minerva Mills v. Union of India Context triple: [Y. V. Chandrachud, notableWork, judgment in Minerva Mills v. Union of India]
-
A.
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India
chosen
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India is a landmark 1980 judgment of the Supreme Court of India that reaffirmed and strengthened the basic structure doctrine by limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
-
B.
Waman Rao v. Union of India
Waman Rao v. Union of India is a landmark 1981 Supreme Court of India judgment that reaffirmed and clarified the basic structure doctrine by upholding its applicability to constitutional amendments made after the Kesavananda Bharati decision.
-
C.
S. S. Dhanoa v. Union of India
S. S. Dhanoa v. Union of India is a Supreme Court of India judgment that examined the constitutional status, powers, and independence of the Election Commission and its officers in the context of electoral administration.
-
D.
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India is a landmark 1997 Supreme Court of India judgment that reaffirmed judicial review as part of the Constitution’s basic structure and held that decisions of tribunals are subject to scrutiny by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227.
-
E.
Joseph Shine v. Union of India
Joseph Shine v. Union of India is a landmark 2018 Supreme Court of India judgment that decriminalized adultery by striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional and discriminatory.
- 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_69d886d8e96081909870bff6c3d0bf09 |
completed | April 10, 2026, 5:12 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e42dfa0a408190880804d463305867 |
completed | April 19, 2026, 1:20 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_6a01676382388190ab82bd10bd53f59e |
completed | May 11, 2026, 5:21 a.m. |
Created at: April 10, 2026, 5:39 a.m.