Triple
T204631
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Arizona v. United States |
E4583
|
entity |
| Predicate | stateLawAtIssue |
P10245
|
FINISHED |
| Object |
Arizona Senate Bill 1070
Arizona Senate Bill 1070 is a controversial 2010 Arizona immigration law that sought to empower state and local police to enforce federal immigration rules and became the subject of the U.S. Supreme Court case Arizona v. United States.
|
E4583
|
NE FINISHED |
How this triple was built (5 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: Arizona Senate Bill 1070 | Statement: [Arizona v. United States, stateLawAtIssue, Arizona Senate Bill 1070]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Arizona Senate Bill 1070 Context triple: [Arizona v. United States, stateLawAtIssue, Arizona Senate Bill 1070]
-
A.
Arizona v. United States
Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
-
B.
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act is a 1993 U.S. federal law that aims to protect individuals’ religious practices from substantial government burdens unless justified by a compelling governmental interest pursued through the least restrictive means.
-
C.
Shelby County v. Holder
Shelby County v. Holder is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by striking down the formula used to determine which jurisdictions required federal preclearance for changes to their voting laws.
-
D.
Miranda v. Arizona
Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the requirement for police to inform criminal suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during custodial interrogations.
-
E.
United States v. Lopez
United States v. Lopez is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked the first time in decades the Court struck down a federal law for exceeding Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause, signaling a revival of limits on federal regulatory authority.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NEDg
Description generation
gpt-5.1
Instruction
Generate a one-sentence description of the target entity. You are given a context triple in the form (subject, predicate, object), where the object is the target entity. # Instructions Use the triple to infer relevant information about the entity. Describe the entity based on what is most defining, well-known. Avoid repeating the information from the triple, unless really essential. # Response Format Return only the sentence: "Description: [one-sentence description of the target entity]"
Input
Entity: Arizona Senate Bill 1070 Triple: [Arizona v. United States, stateLawAtIssue, Arizona Senate Bill 1070]
Generated description
Arizona Senate Bill 1070 is a controversial 2010 Arizona immigration law that sought to empower state and local police to enforce federal immigration rules and became the subject of the U.S. Supreme Court case Arizona v. United States.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Arizona Senate Bill 1070 Target entity description: Arizona Senate Bill 1070 is a controversial 2010 Arizona immigration law that sought to empower state and local police to enforce federal immigration rules and became the subject of the U.S. Supreme Court case Arizona v. United States.
-
A.
Arizona v. United States
chosen
Arizona v. United States is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that limited state authority over immigration enforcement by affirming broad federal power in this area.
-
B.
Religious Freedom Restoration Act
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act is a 1993 U.S. federal law that aims to protect individuals’ religious practices from substantial government burdens unless justified by a compelling governmental interest pursued through the least restrictive means.
-
C.
Shelby County v. Holder
Shelby County v. Holder is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision that significantly weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by striking down the formula used to determine which jurisdictions required federal preclearance for changes to their voting laws.
-
D.
Miranda v. Arizona
Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the requirement for police to inform criminal suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during custodial interrogations.
-
E.
United States v. Lopez
United States v. Lopez is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that marked the first time in decades the Court struck down a federal law for exceeding Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause, signaling a revival of limits on federal regulatory authority.
- F. None of above.
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: stateLawAtIssue Context triple: [Arizona v. United States, stateLawAtIssue, Arizona Senate Bill 1070]
-
A.
legalJurisdiction
Indicates the legal authority or geographic area whose laws and courts have the power to govern, regulate, or adjudicate matters involving the related entities.
-
B.
associatedLawProclaimedAt
Indicates the date, time, or event at which a particular law or legal act was formally proclaimed or officially announced.
-
C.
governmentJurisdiction
Indicates the governmental body or authority that has legal power, control, or regulatory oversight over a given entity or activity.
-
D.
legalSystem
Indicates the formal framework of laws, rules, and institutions that governs how legal matters are defined, interpreted, and enforced within a society or jurisdiction.
-
E.
countryJurisdiction
Indicates that one country has legal authority, control, or governing power over a specified territory, entity, or matter.
- F. None of above. chosen
Provenance (7 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_69a25737567c81908f9c505300239181 |
completed | Feb. 28, 2026, 2:47 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69a25f46b4f081909e5ee3718109a71f |
completed | Feb. 28, 2026, 3:21 a.m. |
| NED1 | Entity disambiguation (via context triple) | batch_69a32bc77734819095e6cf53a10aa3d8 |
completed | Feb. 28, 2026, 5:54 p.m. |
| NEDg | Description generation | batch_69a32c29d99081908ed22bfb073ad5bd |
completed | Feb. 28, 2026, 5:55 p.m. |
| NED2 | Entity disambiguation (via description) | batch_69a32cc49eb08190ad97fdd8ead436f7 |
completed | Feb. 28, 2026, 5:58 p.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69a25b4b42ec8190bef16bbbdd30a742 |
completed | Feb. 28, 2026, 3:04 a.m. |
| PDg | Predicate description generation | batch_69a25f4602c081909e89de233cbc5670 |
completed | Feb. 28, 2026, 3:21 a.m. |
Created at: Feb. 28, 2026, 2:51 a.m.