Triple
T21190093
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Arizona v. Johnson |
E522188
|
entity |
| Predicate | hasFullCaseName |
P3131
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Arizona v. Johnson |
—
|
NE NERFINISHED |
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: Arizona v. Johnson | Statement: [Arizona v. Johnson, hasFullCaseName, Arizona v. Johnson]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Arizona v. Johnson Context triple: [Arizona v. Johnson, hasFullCaseName, Arizona v. Johnson]
-
A.
Arizona v. Johnson
chosen
Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
-
B.
Gonzales v. Arizona
Gonzales v. Arizona is a U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the constitutionality of Arizona’s voter identification and proof-of-citizenship requirements for voter registration and voting.
-
C.
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.
-
D.
Arizona v. Evans
Arizona v. Evans is a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case that extended the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule to evidence obtained through an arrest based on erroneous computer records.
-
E.
Arizona v. Fulminante
Arizona v. Fulminante is a landmark 1991 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held a coerced confession can be treated as trial error subject to harmless-error analysis rather than as automatically requiring reversal of a conviction.
- F. None of above.
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
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_69e0b51061388190aa03f19700d3ef04 |
completed | April 16, 2026, 10:08 a.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69e733372b488190920174955b4b9172 |
completed | April 21, 2026, 8:20 a.m. |
Created at: April 16, 2026, 3:07 p.m.