Triple
T23380331
| Position | Surface form | Disambiguated ID | Type / Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario |
E593726
|
entity |
| Predicate | appliesLaw |
P125
|
FINISHED |
| Object | Gaming Control Act, 1992 |
—
|
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: Gaming Control Act, 1992 | Statement: [Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, appliesLaw, Gaming Control Act, 1992]
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Gaming Control Act, 1992 Context triple: [Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, appliesLaw, Gaming Control Act, 1992]
-
A.
Gambling Act 2005
The Gambling Act 2005 is a key piece of UK legislation that modernised and regulates gambling activities, setting out licensing rules, consumer protections, and the framework for oversight of the gambling industry.
-
B.
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is a 1988 U.S. federal law that establishes the legal framework and regulatory structure for Native American gaming operations on tribal lands.
-
C.
Hart–Agnew anti-betting laws
The Hart–Agnew anti-betting laws were early 20th-century New York State statutes that severely restricted gambling on horse racing, leading to the temporary shutdown of many racetracks and reshaping the sport’s economics in the state.
-
D.
Betting Duty Ordinance
The Betting Duty Ordinance is a Hong Kong law that regulates and imposes taxes on betting and gambling activities, administered by the Inland Revenue Department.
-
E.
Bureau of Gaming Enforcement
The Bureau of Gaming Enforcement is a specialized division of the Pennsylvania State Police responsible for enforcing gaming laws and overseeing the integrity of casino and gambling operations in the state.
- 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: Gaming Control Act, 1992 Target entity description: The Gaming Control Act, 1992 is an Ontario statute that establishes the legal framework for regulating and overseeing gaming activities and operators in the province.
-
A.
Gambling Act 2005
The Gambling Act 2005 is a key piece of UK legislation that modernised and regulates gambling activities, setting out licensing rules, consumer protections, and the framework for oversight of the gambling industry.
-
B.
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is a 1988 U.S. federal law that establishes the legal framework and regulatory structure for Native American gaming operations on tribal lands.
-
C.
Hart–Agnew anti-betting laws
The Hart–Agnew anti-betting laws were early 20th-century New York State statutes that severely restricted gambling on horse racing, leading to the temporary shutdown of many racetracks and reshaping the sport’s economics in the state.
-
D.
Betting Duty Ordinance
The Betting Duty Ordinance is a Hong Kong law that regulates and imposes taxes on betting and gambling activities, administered by the Inland Revenue Department.
-
E.
Bureau of Gaming Enforcement
The Bureau of Gaming Enforcement is a specialized division of the Pennsylvania State Police responsible for enforcing gaming laws and overseeing the integrity of casino and gambling operations in the state.
- 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_69e25d268a50819095f2fd479da8ef3f |
completed | April 17, 2026, 4:17 p.m. |
| NER | Named-entity recognition | batch_69f1a3b6ddfc8190a23d291286f3fe42 |
completed | April 29, 2026, 6:22 a.m. |
Created at: April 17, 2026, 5:34 p.m.