Triple
T20023476
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co. |
E494917
|
entity |
| Predicate | subsequentInterpretation |
P34632
|
FINISHED |
| Object | limited and rejected by Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida |
—
|
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: limited and rejected by Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida | Statement: [Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co., subsequentInterpretation, limited and rejected by Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: subsequentInterpretation Context triple: [Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co., subsequentInterpretation, limited and rejected by Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida]
-
A.
interpretiveConsequence
Indicates that one entity is a conclusion, implication, or interpretive outcome that follows from another entity.
-
B.
intendedInterpretation
Indicates that one entity is meant to be understood or interpreted in a particular way, sense, or meaning relative to another.
-
C.
laterReinterpretedAs
chosen
Indicates that something was originally understood or classified one way but was subsequently given a different interpretation or meaning at a later time.
-
D.
subsequentUse
Indicates that one entity is used, applied, or consumed after another entity in time or sequence.
-
E.
subsequentCase
Indicates that one legal case follows another in time or procedural order, often relying on or referencing the earlier case.
- 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_69da626bfd288190aa5d65098b6433ae |
completed | April 11, 2026, 3:02 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e6628a1ecc8190bf6ee0bedb61e0b8 |
completed | April 20, 2026, 5:29 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e54ce752748190a0a1ffddd0372271 |
completed | April 19, 2026, 9:45 p.m. |
Created at: April 11, 2026, 3:35 p.m.