Triple
T22347962
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Earl Jowitt |
E552443
|
entity |
| Predicate | associatedLegalSystemOfTitleHolder |
P16986
|
FINISHED |
| Object | English law |
—
|
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: English law | Statement: [Earl Jowitt, associatedLegalSystemOfTitleHolder, English law]
PD
Predicate disambiguation
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target predicate: associatedLegalSystemOfTitleHolder Context triple: [Earl Jowitt, associatedLegalSystemOfTitleHolder, English law]
-
A.
relatedLegalSystem
chosen
Indicates that there is an association or connection between two legal systems, such as influence, similarity, shared origin, or mutual relevance.
-
B.
legalHolding
Indicates that an entity possesses or controls something (such as property, assets, or rights) in a manner recognized and defined by law.
-
C.
hasTitleInLaw
Indicates that an entity holds or is designated by a specific formal title as defined or recognized in law.
-
D.
usedLegalSystemOf
Indicates that one entity applied, followed, or operated under the legal system or body of laws belonging to another entity.
-
E.
ownershipInLaw
Indicates a legal relationship in which one entity holds recognized ownership rights over another entity or asset under applicable law.
- 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_69e11e4a0ad08190a385b4d343cf6524 |
completed | April 16, 2026, 5:37 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f157995bec819080b8d05fa88704ed |
completed | April 29, 2026, 12:58 a.m. |
| PD | Predicate disambiguation | batch_69e7300c20088190a59e5bf9e70384f3 |
completed | April 21, 2026, 8:06 a.m. |
Created at: April 16, 2026, 8:43 p.m.