Triple
T23300926
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | D & C Builders Ltd v Rees |
E590299
|
entity |
| Predicate | appliesPrecedent |
P3138
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Foakes v Beer |
—
|
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: Foakes v Beer | Statement: [D & C Builders Ltd v Rees, appliesPrecedent, Foakes v Beer]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Foakes v Beer Context triple: [D & C Builders Ltd v Rees, appliesPrecedent, Foakes v Beer]
-
A.
Beer v. United States
Beer v. United States is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that defined the “non-retrogression” standard for evaluating changes to voting laws under the Voting Rights Act.
-
B.
Brewer v. Williams
Brewer v. Williams is a landmark 1977 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified Sixth Amendment right-to-counsel protections during police interrogations, particularly regarding the admissibility of statements deliberately elicited from an indicted defendant in the absence of counsel.
-
C.
Keeble v Hickeringill
Keeble v Hickeringill is an early 18th-century English common law case famous for establishing that malicious interference with another’s lawful use of their land, such as scaring away ducks from a decoy pond, can give rise to an action for damages.
-
D.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
-
E.
Stack v. Boyle
Stack v. Boyle is a 1951 U.S. Supreme Court case that established constitutional limits on excessive bail in the context of prosecutions under the Smith Act.
- 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: Foakes v Beer Target entity description: Foakes v Beer is a landmark 1884 English contract law case establishing that part payment of a debt does not discharge the whole debt without fresh consideration.
-
A.
Beer v. United States
Beer v. United States is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that defined the “non-retrogression” standard for evaluating changes to voting laws under the Voting Rights Act.
-
B.
Brewer v. Williams
Brewer v. Williams is a landmark 1977 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified Sixth Amendment right-to-counsel protections during police interrogations, particularly regarding the admissibility of statements deliberately elicited from an indicted defendant in the absence of counsel.
-
C.
Keeble v Hickeringill
Keeble v Hickeringill is an early 18th-century English common law case famous for establishing that malicious interference with another’s lawful use of their land, such as scaring away ducks from a decoy pond, can give rise to an action for damages.
-
D.
Ray v. Blair
Ray v. Blair is a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a state's authority to require presidential electors to pledge support for their party's nominees as a condition of appointment.
-
E.
Stack v. Boyle
Stack v. Boyle is a 1951 U.S. Supreme Court case that established constitutional limits on excessive bail in the context of prosecutions under the Smith Act.
- 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_69e25d1c0ecc8190a355aa229f06d0e0 |
completed | April 17, 2026, 4:17 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f196d37fd08190ad2d199c54324c02 |
completed | April 29, 2026, 5:27 a.m. |
Created at: April 17, 2026, 5:04 p.m.