Triple

T20507869
Position Surface form Disambiguated ID Type / Status
Subject Missouri–Iowa border E503481 entity
Predicate hasCourtCase P17092 FINISHED
Object State of Missouri v. State of Iowa NE NERFINISHED

How this triple was built (3 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: State of Missouri v. State of Iowa | Statement: [Missouri–Iowa border, hasCourtCase, State of Missouri v. State of Iowa]
NED1 Entity disambiguation (via context triple) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: State of Missouri v. State of Iowa
Context triple: [Missouri–Iowa border, hasCourtCase, State of Missouri v. State of Iowa]
  • A. Cummings v. Missouri
    Cummings v. Missouri was an 1867 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down post–Civil War loyalty oath requirements as unconstitutional bills of attainder and ex post facto laws.
  • B. Missouri statehood controversy
    The Missouri statehood controversy was an early 19th-century political conflict over the expansion of slavery into new U.S. territories, culminating in the Missouri Compromise and exposing deep sectional tensions between North and South.
  • C. Missouri v. Frye
    Missouri v. Frye is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that held defense counsel has a duty to communicate formal plea offers to a criminal defendant as part of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
  • D. Missouri v. Seibert
    Missouri v. Seibert is a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited police use of "question-first, warn-later" interrogation tactics by strengthening Miranda protections for suspects.
  • E. Alabama v. Texas
    Alabama v. Texas is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court addressed a dispute among states over offshore submerged lands and the scope of federal authority under the Constitution.
  • F. None of above. chosen
  • G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2 Entity disambiguation (via description) gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: State of Missouri v. State of Iowa
Target entity description: State of Missouri v. State of Iowa was an 1849 U.S. Supreme Court case that resolved a boundary dispute between Missouri and Iowa over their shared state line.
  • A. Cummings v. Missouri
    Cummings v. Missouri was an 1867 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down post–Civil War loyalty oath requirements as unconstitutional bills of attainder and ex post facto laws.
  • B. Missouri statehood controversy
    The Missouri statehood controversy was an early 19th-century political conflict over the expansion of slavery into new U.S. territories, culminating in the Missouri Compromise and exposing deep sectional tensions between North and South.
  • C. Missouri v. Frye
    Missouri v. Frye is a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court case that held defense counsel has a duty to communicate formal plea offers to a criminal defendant as part of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
  • D. Missouri v. Seibert
    Missouri v. Seibert is a 2004 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited police use of "question-first, warn-later" interrogation tactics by strengthening Miranda protections for suspects.
  • E. Alabama v. Texas
    Alabama v. Texas is a 1954 U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court addressed a dispute among states over offshore submerged lands and the scope of federal authority under the Constitution.
  • F. None of above. chosen

Provenance (2 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_69e0b4b1e52c8190894281cf7e3283ab completed April 16, 2026, 10:06 a.m.
NER Named-entity recognition batch_69e69dc8f3c881908ed2e0257a057e73 completed April 20, 2026, 9:42 p.m.
Created at: April 16, 2026, 11:36 a.m.